MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3086734843 · doi:10.38124/ijisrt20aug624

Edge Based Network Attack Detection Using Pulsar

2020· article· en· W3086734843 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sheetal Dash

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology (IJISRT) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's University
KeywordsDenial-of-service attackComputer securityComputer scienceThe InternetEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionOrder (exchange)Focus (optics)BotnetWorld Wide WebTelecommunicationsBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The edge-based network attacks are increasing largely in size, scale and frequency with the booming internet. The Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks is one of the most diffused types of attacks in the cyberworld which is a great concern for all organizations today. There were 5.2 billion Google searches in the year 2017 alone. Research shows that there cannot be a better example to show how prevalent internet use is nowadays. What started off as a point to point conversation in 1970s as a mode of communication has expanded to millions and millions of devices communicating with each other via some or the other form of the web. And therefore, this research focuses on the strategic approach that has been taken to defend from the growing cyber threat. In this dissertation, the focus is on defending against these edge-based network attacks and collaborating with other neighboring networks in order to communicate with them to transfer information about potentially malicious hosts. This research has focused on exploring ways of integrating the Software Defined Networking with the pub-sub messaging system in order to show a collaborative approach of defense to these attacks. The attacks from unknown multiple sources have also been analyzed in order to cope with them through this robust solution that has been proposed and implemented in this dissertation.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Innovative Science and Research Technology (IJISRT)Same topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207