MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990140997 · doi:10.1109/smc.2019.8914322

A Neural Word Embedding Approach to System Trace Reconstruction

2019· article· en· W2990140997 on OpenAlexaff
Karuna Lakhani, Apurva Narayan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTRACE (psycholinguistics)Data miningWord embeddingWord (group theory)Intrusion detection systemEmbeddingHidden Markov modelNoise (video)Anomaly detectionEvent (particle physics)Benchmark (surveying)Artificial intelligenceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Data generated by real-world systems specifically cyber-physical systems is full of noise, packet loss, and other imperfections. However, most intrusion detection, anomaly de-tection, monitoring, and mining algorithms and frameworks assume that data provided is of perfect quality. Therefore, these algorithms tend to perform extremely well in controlled lab environments but fail in the real-world. We propose a method for accurately restoring discrete tem-poral or sequential system traces affected by data loss, using Word 2vec's Continuous Bag of Words (CBOW) model. The model works by learning to predict the next event in a sequence of events, the model feeds its output back into it for subsequent future predictions. Such a method can reconstruct even long sequence of missing events, and help validate and improve data quality for noisy data. The restored traces are very close to the real-data and can be used by algorithms depending on real-data for system analysis. We demonstrate our method by reconstructing traces from QNX real-time operating system consisting of long sequences of discrete events. We show that given even small parts of a QNX trace, our CBOW model can predict future events with an accuracy of almost 90% outperforming the Markov Model benchmark.

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 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 score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.255

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207