A Deep Learning Approach for IoT Traffic Multi-Classification in a Smart-City Scenario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the number of Internet of Things (IoT) devices and applications increases, the capacity of the IoT access networks is considerably stressed. This can create significant performance bottlenecks in various layers of an end-to-end communication path, including the scheduling of the spectrum, the resource requirements for processing the IoT data at the Edge and/or Cloud, and the attainable delay for critical emergency scenarios. Thus, a proper classification or prediction of the time varying traffic characteristics of the IoT devices is required. However, this classification remains at large an open challenge. Most of the existing solutions are based on machine learning techniques, which nonetheless present high computational cost, whereas they are not considering the fine-grained flow characteristics of the traffic. To this end, this paper introduces the following four contributions. Firstly, we provide an extended feature set including, flow, packet and device level features to characterize the IoT devices in the context of a smart environment. Secondly, we propose a custom weighting based preprocessing algorithm to determine the importance of the data values. Thirdly, we present insights into traffic characteristics using feature selection and correlation mechanisms. Finally, we develop a two-stage learning algorithm and we demonstrate its ability to accurately categorize the IoT devices in two different datasets. The evaluation results show that the proposed learning framework achieves 99.9% accuracy for the first dataset and 99.8% accuracy for the second. Additionally, for the first dataset we achieve a precision and recall performance of 99.6% and 99.5%, while for the second dataset the precission and recall attained is of 99.6% and 99.7% respectively. These results show that our approach clearly outperforms other well-known machine learning methods. Hence, this work provides a useful model deployed in a realistic IoT scenario, where IoT traffic and devices’ profiles are predicted and classified, while facilitating the data processing in the upper layers of an end-to-end communication model.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".