MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086338338 · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2012.01.069

Applying Variable Coe_cient functions to Self-Organizing Feature Maps for Network Intrusion Detection on the 1999 KDD Cup Dataset

2012· article· en· W2086338338 on OpenAlexaff
Charlie Obimbo, Matthew Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia Computer Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEuclidean distanceData miningDimension (graph theory)Intrusion detection systemSample (material)Feature (linguistics)Artificial intelligenceClass (philosophy)Pattern recognition (psychology)IntrusionEuclidean geometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Self-Organizing Feature Maps (SOFM's) can be a valuable element in a network intrusion detection system. When classification is performed on a segment of network tra_c, the usual method for class determination is selecting the class which has the smallest measurement of the Euclidean distance from the multi-dimensional network tra_c sample to the class’ multi-dimensional prototype. This minimum distance is calculated with equivalent weights for each dimension of data in the network tra_c sample. In this paper we explore the possibility of applying di_erent randomly generated weightings to each dimension of data in the network tra_c sample to increase positive classifications of the network sample data provided by the 1999 KDD Cup Dataset. We show that there is improvement, and recommend that further studies be done in choosing the right evolutionary functions to help modify the hotspots and achieve better results.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia Computer ScienceSame topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207