Enhancing Trust Management for Wireless Intrusion Detection via Traffic Sampling in the Era of Big Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Internet of Things (IoT) has been widely used in our daily life, which enables various objects to be interconnected for data exchange, including physical devices, vehicles, and other items embedded with network connectivity. Wireless sensor network (WSN) is a vital application of IoT, providing many kinds of information among sensors, whereas such network is vulnerable to a wide range of attacks, especially insider attacks, due to its natural environment and inherent unreliable transmission. To safeguard its security, intrusion detection systems (IDSs) are widely adopted in a WSN to defend against insider attacks through implementing proper trust-based mechanisms. However, in the era of big data, sensors may generate excessive information and data, which could degrade the effectiveness of trust computation. In this paper, we focus on this challenge and propose a way of combining Bayesian-based trust management with traffic sampling for wireless intrusion detection under a hierarchical structure. In the evaluation, we investigate the performance of our approach in both a simulated and a real network environment. Experimental results demonstrate that packet-based trust management would become ineffective in a heavy traffic environment, and that our approach can help lighten the burden of IDSs in handling traffic, while maintaining the detection of insider attacks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".