MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040197085 · doi:10.1016/j.icte.2020.06.003

Unsupervised log message anomaly detection

2020· article· en· W3040197085 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

VenueICT Express · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoencoderAnomaly detectionAnomaly (physics)Isolation (microbiology)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceData miningPattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)Deep learningBioinformaticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Log messages are now broadly used in cloud and software systems. They are important for classification and anomaly detection as millions of logs are generated each day. In this paper, an unsupervised model for log message anomaly detection is proposed which employs Isolation Forest and two deep Autoencoder networks. The Autoencoder networks are used for training and feature extraction, and then for anomaly detection, while Isolation Forest is used for positive sample prediction. The proposed model is evaluated using the BGL, Openstack and Thunderbird log message data sets. The results obtained show that the number of negative samples predicted to be positive is low, especially with Isolation Forest and one Autoencoder. Further, the results are better than with other well-known models.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.229
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