MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Drones' Face off: Authentication by Machine Learning in Autonomous IoT Systems

2019· article· en· W3005810169 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
TopicUser Authentication and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDroneComputer scienceSpoofing attackInternet of ThingsAuthentication (law)Artificial intelligenceSupport vector machineMachine learningReal-time computingComputer visionComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autonomous Internet-of-Things (IoT) are comprised of moving objects such as drones and rovers that use self-control techniques to accomplish a mission while following a path. However, losing control in such systems usually by spoofing their sensors or hijacking with misleading commands can lead to catastrophic safety consequences. In this paper, we close the gap by authenticating the behavior of autonomous IoT systems during operation. In particular, we check the behavior of a moving IoT object, e.g., a drone, by evaluating its time-series telemetry traces during the flight. We examine three different machine-learning algorithms for this purpose, namely, K-Nearest Neighbour (KNN), Support Vector Machine (SVM), and Logistic Regression (LR). Our results show that KNN is the best method of the three selected techniques for authentication in dynamic IoT systems, e.g., drones. We achieved 93.4% in precision rate and 100% recall rate with KNN.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations19
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUser Authentication and Security SystemsFrench-language works237,207