Self Organizing Feature Map for Fake Task Attack Modelling in Mobile Crowdsensing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clogging attacks in mobile crowdsensing (MCS) denote injection of fake sensing tasks into MCS campaigns in order to interfere with service ability and user participation in sensing campaigns. Due to the lack of a realistic location-based and energy-oriented clogging attack model in MCS, this type of attacks have not been well investigated. To this end, for the first time, we introduce a self organizing feature map (SOFM)-based clogging attack model that aims at maximizing the number of affected participants according to the location of attack zones. These zones are identified by clustering 2-D coordinates of all potential participants and finding out aggregation areas of their mobile devices. We evaluate and verify the introduced attack model via simulations by comparing it to an attack model that relies on random mobility of illegitimate tasks over the attack zones. Our simulation results demonstrate that SOFM-based modeling of clogging attacks in MCS results in a significant impact with almost 50% affected participant population, 24% affected recruitment decisions, and up to 28% energy overhead introduced by illegitimate tasks injected to the MCS campaigns.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".