MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942788712 · doi:10.1109/iscas.2019.8702583

Machine Learning Techniques for Classifying Network Anomalies and Intrusions

2019· article· en· W2942788712 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMachine learningRecurrent neural networkDeep learningArtificial neural networkBorder Gateway ProtocolIntrusion detection systemRouting (electronic design automation)Data miningRouting protocolComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using machine learning techniques to detect network intrusions is an important topic in cybersecurity. A variety of machine learning models have been designed to help detect malicious intentions of network users. We employ two deep learning recurrent neural networks with a variable number of hidden layers: Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) and Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU). We also evaluate the recently proposed Broad Learning System (BLS) and its extensions. The models are trained and tested using Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) datasets that contain routing records collected from Réseaux IP Européens (RIPE) and BCNET as well as the NLS-KDD dataset containing network connection records. The algorithms are compared based on accuracy and F-Score.

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)0.000
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 score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Quick stats

Citations72
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207