MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Transfer Learning for Behavioral Biometrics-based Continuous User Authentication

2022· article· en· W4291701058 on OpenAlexaff
Sanket Vilas Salunke, Abdelkader Ouda, Jonathan Gagné

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 International Symposium on Networks, Computers and Communications (ISNCC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUser Authentication and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsToronto Public HealthWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiometricsComputer scienceAuthentication (law)Human–computer interactionTransfer of learningComputer securityArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cybersecurity industry is developing innovative solutions to avoid cyber-attacks. One such upcoming technology is continuous user authentication. It uses keystrokes and mouse movement behavioral patterns to authenticate the user continuously in the background. This technique uses machine learning to classify users based on the behavioral pattern. It requires a lot of data to find the user’s behavioral pattern and plenty of time is required to gather the data which extends the start of continuously authenticating the new user. In this research, the transfer learning technique was used for a feed-forward neural network model to overcome this issue for new users. Experiments were done using only one behavioral pattern with a set of 5 users to find the difference in accuracy between the model trained with transfer learning and the model trained without any previous learning. The results showed that the model using transfer learning had 9.76% more accuracy than the model trained from scratch. This implies that using transfer learning improves the accuracy with a small amount of data which will help to speed up the onboarding process for new users. This work generates new knowledge which will allow the researchers to implement various machine learning techniques with multiple behavioral patterns, thereby providing the best model performance for transfer learning.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.252 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 International Symposium on Networks, Computers and Communications (ISNCC)Same topicUser Authentication and Security SystemsFrench-language works237,207