MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226515701 · doi:10.36227/techrxiv.19210197

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

2022· preprint· en· W4226515701 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Omar Abdul Wahab

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConcept driftIntrusion detection systemComputer scienceAnomaly detectionArtificial intelligenceWeightingArtificial neural networkData miningOutlierData stream miningMachine learningDeep learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div>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.</div>

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.693

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207