Evaluation of machine learning techniques for network intrusion detection
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Network traffic anomaly may indicate a possible intrusion in the network and therefore anomaly detection is important to detect and prevent the security attacks. The early research work in this area and commercially available Intrusion Detection Systems (IDS) are mostly signature-based. The problem of signature based method is that the database signature needs to be updated as new attack signatures become available and therefore it is not suitable for the real-time network anomaly detection. The recent trend in anomaly detection is based on machine learning classification techniques. We apply seven different machine learning techniques with information entropy calculation to Kyoto 2006+ data set and evaluate the performance of these techniques. Our findings show that, for this particular data set, most machine learning techniques provide higher than 90% precision, recall and accuracy. However, using area under the Receiver Operating Curve (ROC) metric, we find that Radial Basis Function (RBF) performs the best among the seven algorithms studied in this work.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it