MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127431059 · doi:10.1109/giis.2009.5307054

Applying kernel methods to anomaly based intrusion detection systems

2009· article· en· W2127431059 on OpenAlexaff
Karim Ali, Raouf Boutaba

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntrusion detection systemAnomaly detectionComputer scienceCluster analysisKernel (algebra)Data miningCluster (spacecraft)Anomaly (physics)Kernel density estimationSignature (topology)Pattern recognition (psychology)Anomaly-based intrusion detection systemArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intrusion detection systems constitute a crucial cornerstone in securing computer networks especially after the recent advancements in attacking techniques. IDSes can be categorized according to the nature of detection into two major categories: signature-based and anomaly-based. In this paper we present KBIDS, a kernel-based method for an anomaly-based IDS that tries to cluster the training data to be able to classify the test data correctly. The method depends on the K-Means algorithm that is used for clustering. Our experiments show that the accuracy of detection of KBIDS increases exponentially with the number of clusters. However, the time taken to classify the given test data increase linearly with the number of clusters. It can be derived from the results that 16 clusters are sufficient to achieve an acceptable error rate while keeping the detection delay in bounds.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.268 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207