MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086160343 · doi:10.1109/cnsr.2007.70

Using Neuro-Fuzzy Approach to Reduce False Positive Alerts

2007· article· en· W2086160343 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceIntrusion detection systemNeuro-fuzzyFuzzy logicData miningArtificial intelligenceMachine learningFalse positive rateFuzzy control system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the major problems of Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) at the present is the high rate of false alerts that the systems produce. These alerts cause problems to human analysts to repeatedly and intensively analyze the false alerts to initiate appropriate actions. We demonstrate the advantages of using a hybrid neuro-fuzzy approach to reduce the number of false alarms. The neuro-fuzzy approach was experimented with different background knowledge sets in DARPA 1999 network traffic dataset. The approach was evaluated and compared with RIPPER algorithm. The results shows that the neuro- fuzzy approach significantly reduces the number of false alarms more than the RIPPER algorithm and requires less background knowledge sets.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.756
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207