MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3207467265 · doi:10.1109/sose52839.2021.00011

Adversarial Machine Learning-Driven Fake Task Anticipation in Mobile Crowdsensing Systems

2021· article· en· W3207467265 on OpenAlexafffund
Zhiyan Chen, Burak Kantarcı

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAdversarial systemCrowdsensingComputer scienceAnticipation (artificial intelligence)Task (project management)Computer securityServerMachine learningArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile Crowdsensing (MCS) enables access to distributed sensing sources of personalized devices so to support various smart services. Services and applications that can benefit from MCS are various such as transportation, health care, public safety, smart mobility and many others. Distributed nature and lack of a pre-established trust mechanism in MCS systems make them vulnerable in the presence of various threats that can be initiated by either sensing data providers or service requesters. While it is relatively easier to detect and eliminate false sensing data submissions via outlier detection, tasks that are submitted to keep the MCS servers and participating devices occupied and clogged are challenging since these attacks can be planned intelligently. In this paper, we investigate the potential of adversarial machine learning to anticipate fake / illegitimate task submissions to MCS systems. To this end, we empower a threat anticipation mechanism that leverages a Generative Adversarial Network (GAN) to inject adversarial samples of fake / illegitimate tasks to an MCS system. We evaluate the impact of GAN-driven attacks in terms of Adversarial Attack Success Rate (AASR) and Attack Severity (AS). Our numerical results show that the potential risk and severity of the offensive use of Machine Learning is significantly higher than an adversarial baseline that injects fake tasks solely based on random noise samples.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.380
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMobile Crowdsensing and CrowdsourcingFrench-language works237,207