Black-Hole Attack Mitigation in Medical Sensor Networks Using the Enhanced Gravitational Search Algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In today’s world, one of the most severe attacks that wireless sensor networks (WSNs) face is a Black-Hole (BH) attack which is a type of Denial of Service (DoS) attack. This attack blocks data and injects infected programs into a set of sensors in a group to capture packets before reached to the target. Therefore, raw data in the BH region is thwarted and is unable to reach its destination. The network is susceptible to various types of attacks as it is accessible to all types of users and minimizing the energy depletion without compromising the network lifetime is an NP-hard problem. Even though numerous protocols came into effect to overcome the BH attack and to enhance the security of packet delivery in WSNs, Simulated Annealing Black-hole attack Detection (SABD) based Enhanced Gravitational Search Algorithm (EGSA) is yet another implemented strategy to reduce the BH attacks. EGSA-SABD detects and isolates the BH infectors in WSNs. Initially, sensor nodes are hierarchically clustered using similar residual energy to reduce energy consumption. Then, the BH attack possibility in a deployed node is evaluated to find the existence of BH nodes in the region. In the end, EGSA-SABD is employed to detect and quarantine BH attackers in WSNs. The performance of EGSA-SABD is evaluated with certain metrics such as BH attack detection probability rate (BHatt_Prate), energy consumption (Ec), Duration of BH attack detection (Attduration), Packet delivery ratio (Pdr). Based on the experimental observations, the EGSA-SABD outperforms the BHatt_Prate by 13% and also reduces the energy consumption by 21%.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".