MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2471817886

A fuzzy feature evaluation framework for network intrusion detection

2008· article· en· W2471817886 on OpenAlexaff
Iosif-Viorel Onut

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFeature selectionIntrusion detection systemData miningSchema (genetic algorithms)Feature (linguistics)Network securityNetwork packetClassifier (UML)Artificial intelligenceProcess (computing)Misuse detectionMachine learningAnomaly-based intrusion detection systemComputer security
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The design of a Network Intrusion Detection System (NIDS) is a delicate process which requires the successful completion of numerous design stages. The feature selection stage is one of the first steps that needs to be addressed, and can be considered among the top most important ones. If this step is not carefully considered the overall performance of the NIDS will greatly suffer, regardless of the detection technique, or any other algorithms that the NIDS is using. The most common approach for selecting the network features is to use expert knowledge to reason about the selection process. However, this approach is not deterministic, thus, in most cases researchers end-up with completely different sets of important features for the detection process. Furthermore, the lack of a generally accepted feature classification schema forces different researchers to use different names for the same (subsets of) features, or the same name for completely different ones. It is our belief that these issues are not sufficiently studied and explored by the network security research community. This thesis focuses on mining the most useful network features for attack detection. Accordingly, we propose a new network feature classification schema as well as a mathematical feature evaluation procedure that helps us identify the most useful features that can be extracted from network packets. The network feature classification schema is intended to provide a better understanding, and enforce a new standard, upon the features that can be extracted from network packets, and their relationships. The classification has a set of 27 feature categories based on the network abstractions that they refer to (e.g., host, network, connection, etc). We use our feature classification schema to select a comprehensive set of 671 features for conducting and reporting our experimental findings. The feature evaluation procedure provides a deterministic approach for pinpointing those network features that are indeed useful in the attack detection process. The procedure uses mathematical, statistical and fuzzy logic techniques to rank the participation of individual features into the detection process. In particular, we propose a new feature dependency measure for independent evaluation criteria that is, to our knowledge, a pioneer method designed for intrusion detection. In our research we have identified several tuning parameters that directly influence the detection performance of each individual feature. To address this issue, our method takes into account the performance of each feature while using multiple tunings, making the evaluation process more robust to biases that could be accidentally introduced by a poor tuning combination. The experimental results, conducted on three different real-world network datasets, empirically confirm that our feature evaluation model can successfully be applied to mine the importance of a feature in the detection process.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207