Android Malware Detection Based on Factorization Machine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the popularity of Android smart phones has increased in recent years, so too has the number of malicious applications. Due to the potential for data theft that mobile phone users face, the detection of malware on Android devices has become an increasingly important issue for the field of cyber security. Traditional methods like signature-based routines are unable to protect users from the ever-increasing sophistication and rapid behavior changes in new types of Android malware. Therefore, a great deal of effort has been made recently to use machine learning models and methods to characterize and generalize the malicious behavior patterns of mobile apps for malware detection. In this paper, we propose a novel and highly reliable classifier for Android Malware detection based on a Factorization Machine architecture and the extraction of Android app features from manifest files and source code. Our results indicate that the numerical feature representation of an app typically results in a long and highly sparse vector and that the interactions among different features are critical to revealing malicious behavior patterns. After performing an extensive performance evaluation, our proposed method achieved a test result of 100.00% precision score on the DREBIN dataset and 99.22% precision score with only 1.10% false positive rate on the AMD dataset. These metrics match the performance of state-of-the-art machine-learning-based Android malware detection methods and several commercial antivirus engines with the benefit of training up to 50 times faster.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".