MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158959845 · doi:10.3390/e23050529

A Review on Machine Learning Approaches for Network Malicious Behavior Detection in Emerging Technologies

2021· review· en· W3158959845 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

VenueEntropy · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceMachine learningArtificial intelligenceBenchmark (surveying)Anomaly detectionIntrusion detection systemEnsemble learningData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Network anomaly detection systems (NADSs) play a significant role in every network defense system as they detect and prevent malicious activities. Therefore, this paper offers an exhaustive overview of different aspects of anomaly-based network intrusion detection systems (NIDSs). Additionally, contemporary malicious activities in network systems and the important properties of intrusion detection systems are discussed as well. The present survey explains important phases of NADSs, such as pre-processing, feature extraction and malicious behavior detection and recognition. In addition, with regard to the detection and recognition phase, recent machine learning approaches including supervised, unsupervised, new deep and ensemble learning techniques have been comprehensively discussed; moreover, some details about currently available benchmark datasets for training and evaluating machine learning techniques are provided by the researchers. In the end, potential challenges together with some future directions for machine learning-based NADSs are specified.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.991
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.245 · 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