Detecting Cybersecurity Attacks in Internet of Things Using Artificial Intelligence Methods: A Systematic Literature Review
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, technology has advanced to the fourth industrial revolution (Industry 4.0), where the Internet of things (IoTs), fog computing, computer security, and cyberattacks have evolved exponentially on a large scale. The rapid development of IoT devices and networks in various forms generate enormous amounts of data which in turn demand careful authentication and security. Artificial intelligence (AI) is considered one of the most promising methods for addressing cybersecurity threats and providing security. In this study, we present a systematic literature review (SLR) that categorize, map and survey the existing literature on AI methods used to detect cybersecurity attacks in the IoT environment. The scope of this SLR includes an in-depth investigation on most AI trending techniques in cybersecurity and state-of-art solutions. A systematic search was performed on various electronic databases (SCOPUS, Science Direct, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science, ACM, and MDPI). Out of the identified records, 80 studies published between 2016 and 2021 were selected, surveyed and carefully assessed. This review has explored deep learning (DL) and machine learning (ML) techniques used in IoT security, and their effectiveness in detecting attacks. However, several studies have proposed smart intrusion detection systems (IDS) with intelligent architectural frameworks using AI to overcome the existing security and privacy challenges. It is found that support vector machines (SVM) and random forest (RF) are among the most used methods, due to high accuracy detection another reason may be efficient memory. In addition, other methods also provide better performance such as extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), neural networks (NN) and recurrent neural networks (RNN). This analysis also provides an insight into the AI roadmap to detect threats based on attack categories. Finally, we present recommendations for potential future investigations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it