MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Enhancing The Performance of Network Traffic Classification Methods Using Efficient Feature Selection Models

2021· article· en· W3167113330 on OpenAlexaff
Farzana Alam, Rasha Kashef, Muhammad Jaseemuddin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInternet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-voting
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutoencoderArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceFeature selectionSupport vector machineMachine learningTraffic classificationPattern recognition (psychology)Dimensionality reductionPrincipal component analysisNetwork packetBinary classificationPrecision and recallk-nearest neighbors algorithmClassifier (UML)Data miningFeature (linguistics)Artificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the era of secure communication and the constantly changing pattern of internet applications, traditional packet classification methods fail to achieve the accuracy needed for diverse network management functions. Recently Machine Learning (ML) techniques have been used to design viable packet classification solutions. However, due to the complexity and dynamic feature of internet traffic, efficient packet classification is still challenging for various machine learning algorithms. In this paper, we propose the adoption of feature selection methods through dimensionality reduction to enhance the classifiers' performance. We evaluated the performance of four well-known classifiers, including K-nearest neighbour (KNN), Support Vector Machines (SVM), Decision Trees (DT), and Logistic Regression (LR) with and without feature selection. We used two feature selection methods, including principal component analysis and Autoencoder. Experimental analysis is performed on real network traffic datasets with binary and multi-class categories. We assessed each classifier's performance using precision, recall, f-score, accuracy, and ROC. Experimental results show that the Precision, Recall, and F-score for the Multi-class problem are improved by 4.7 %, 6%, and 9%, respectively, after adopting either PCA or Autoencoder methods. The classification accuracy is also improved by up to 13%. We can also conclude that Autoencoder performed better for the KNN and LR, while PCA achieved comparable results for both the SVM and DT classifiers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInternet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-votingFrench-language works237,207