MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2896432382 · doi:10.1145/3264888.3264893

CORGIDS

2018· article· en· W2896432382 on OpenAlexafffund
Ekta Aggarwal, Mehdi Karimibiuki, Karthik Pattabiraman, A. Ivanov

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Malware Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceCyber-physical systemIntrusion detection systemSoftwareData miningTheoretical computer scienceProgramming languageOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cyber-physical systems (CPS) consist of software and physical components which are knitted together and interact with each other continuously. CPS have been targets of security attacks due to their safety-critical nature and relative lack of protection. Specification based intrusion detection systems (IDS) using data, temporal, data temporal and time, and logical correlations have been proposed in the past. But none of the approaches except the ones using logical correlations take into account the main ingredient in the operation of CPS, namely the use of physical properties. On the other hand, IDS that use physical properties either require the developer to define invariants manually, or have designed their IDS for a specific CPS. This paper proposes CORGIDS, a generic IDS capable of detecting security attacks by inferring the logical correlations of the physical properties of a CPS, and checking if they adhere to the predefined framework. We build a CORGIDS-based prototype and demonstrate its use for detecting attacks in the two CPS. We find that CORGIDS achieves a precision of 95.70%, and a recall of 87.90%, with modest memory and performance overheads.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0060.006
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0470.034

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations22
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Malware Detection TechniquesFrench-language works237,207