Botnet Detection in IoT Devices Using Random Forest Classifier with Independent Component Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With rapid technological progress in the Internet of Things (IoT), it has become imperative to concentrate on its security aspect. This paper represents a model that accounts for the detection of botnets through the use of machine learning algorithms. The model examined anomalies, commonly referred to as botnets, in a cluster of IoT devices attempting to connect to a network. Essentially, this paper exhibited the use of transport layer data (User Datagram Protocol - UDP) generated through IoT devices. An intelligent novel model comprising Random Forest Classifier with Independent Component Analysis (ICA) was proposed for botnet detection in IoT devices. Various machine learning algorithms were also implemented upon the processed data for comparative analysis. The experimental results of the proposed model generated state-of-the-art results for three different datasets, achieving up to 99.99% accuracy effectively with the lowest prediction time of 0.12 seconds without overfitting. The significance of this study lies in detecting botnets in IoT devices effectively and efficiently under all circumstances by utilizing ICA with Random Forest Classifier, which is a simple machine learning algorithm.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".