MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213282066 · doi:10.36227/techrxiv.19210197.v1

Intrusion Detection in the IoT under Data and Concept Drifts: Online Deep Learning Approach

2022· preprint· en· W4213282066 on OpenAlexafffund
Omar Abdul Wahab

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Stream Mining Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConcept driftComputer scienceIntrusion detection systemAnomaly detectionArtificial intelligenceData miningWeightingArtificial neural networkOutlierData stream miningMachine learningDeep learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the existing machine learning-based intrusion detection systems in the Internet of Things (IoT) usually perform well in static environments, they struggle to preserve their performance over time, in dynamic environments. Yet, the IoT is a highly dynamic and heterogeneous environment, leading to what is known as data drift and concept drift. Data drift is a phenomenon which embodies the change that happens in the relationships among the independent features, which is mainly due to changes in the data quality over time. Concept drift is a phenomenon which depicts the change in the relationships between input and output data in the machine learning model over time. To detect data and concept drifts, we first propose a drift detection technique that capitalizes on the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) method to study the change in the variance of the features across the intrusion detection data streams. We also discuss an online outlier detection technique that identifies the outliers that diverge both from historical and temporally close data points. To counter these drifts, we discuss an online deep neural network that dynamically adjusts the sizes of the hidden layers based on the Hedge weighting mechanism, thus enabling the model to steadily learn and adapt as new intrusion data come. Experiments conducted on an IoT based intrusion detection dataset suggest that our solution stabilizes the performance of the intrusion detection on both the training and testing data compared to the static deep neural network model, which is widely used for intrusion detection.

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)0.007
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.255 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Stream Mining TechniquesFrench-language works237,207