An Evolutionary Game-Based Secure Clustering Protocol With Fuzzy Trust Evaluation and Outlier Detection for Wireless Sensor Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trustworthy and reliable data delivery is a challenging task in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) due to unique characteristics and constraints. To acquire secured data delivery and address the conflict between security and energy, in this paper we present an evolutionary game based secure clustering protocol with fuzzy trust evaluation and outlier detection for WSNs. Firstly, a fuzzy trust evaluation method is presented to transform the transmission evidences into trust values while effectively alleviating the trust uncertainty. And then, a K-Means based outlier detection scheme is proposed to further analyze plenty of trust values obtained via fuzzy trust evaluation or trust recommendation. It can discover the commonalities and differences among sensor nodes while improving the accuracy of outlier detection. Finally, we present an evolutionary game based secure clustering protocol to achieve a trade-off between security assurance and energy saving for sensor nodes when electing for the cluster heads. A sensor node which failed to be the cluster head can securely choose its own head by isolating the suspicious nodes. Simulation results verify that our secure clustering protocol can effectively defend the network against the attacks from internal selfish or compromised nodes. Correspondingly, the timely data transfer rate can be improved significantly.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".