MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220887322 · doi:10.18280/ria.360107

TCP/UDP-Based Exploitation DDoS Attacks Detection Using AI Classification Algorithms with Common Uncorrelated Feature Subset Selected by Pearson, Spearman and Kendall Correlation Methods

2022· article· en· W4220887322 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kishore Babu Dasari, Nagaraju Devarakonda

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d intelligence artificielle · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDenial-of-service attackRandom forestComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceNaive Bayes classifierPearson product-moment correlation coefficientMachine learningCorrelationData miningMultilayer perceptronFeature selectionClassifier (UML)Intrusion detection systemPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial neural networkSupport vector machineMathematicsStatisticsThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack is a serious cyber security attack that attempts to disrupt the availability security principle of computer networks and information systems. It's critical to detect DDoS attacks quickly and accurately while using as less computing power as possible in order to minimize damage and cost efficient. This research proposes a fast and high-accuracy detection approach by using features selected by proposed method for Exploitation-based DDoS attacks. Experiments are carried out on the CICDDoS2019 datasets Syn flood, UDP flood, and UDP-Lag, as well as customized dataset. In addition, experiments were also conducted on a customized dataset that was constructed by combining three CICDDoS2019 datasets. Pearson, Spearman, and Kendall correlation techniques have been used for datasets to find un-correlated feature subsets. Then, among three un-correlated feature subsets, choose the common un-correlated features. On the datasets, classification techniques are applied to these common un-correlated features. This research used conventional classifiers Logistic regression, Decision tree, KNN, Naive Bayes, bagging classifier Random forest, boosting classifiers Ada boost, Gradient boost, and neural network-based classifier Multilayer perceptron. The performance of these classification algorithms was also evaluated in terms of accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, specificity, log loss, execution time, and K-fold cross-validation. Finally, classification techniques were tested on a customized dataset with common features that were common in all of the dataset’s common un-correlated feature sets.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d intelligence artificielleSame topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207