MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132068130 · doi:10.1109/tvcg.2011.144

A Survey of Visualization Systems for Network Security

2011· article· en· W2132068130 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Visualization and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisualizationComputer scienceData visualizationData scienceInformation visualizationNetwork securityVisual analyticsTable (database)Creative visualizationData miningComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Security Visualization is a very young term. It expresses the idea that common visualization techniques have been designed for use cases that are not supportive of security-related data, demanding novel techniques fine tuned for the purpose of thorough analysis. Significant amount of work has been published in this area, but little work has been done to study this emerging visualization discipline. We offer a comprehensive review of network security visualization and provide a taxonomy in the form of five use-case classes encompassing nearly all recent works in this area. We outline the incorporated visualization techniques and data sources and provide an informative table to display our findings. From the analysis of these systems, we examine issues and concerns regarding network security visualization and provide guidelines and directions for future researchers and visual system developers.

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)0.001
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 score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score0.885

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.246 · 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