MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292506131 · doi:10.3390/s22165986

A Hybrid Intrusion Detection Model Using EGA-PSO and Improved Random Forest Method

2022· article· en· W4292506131 on OpenAlexaff
Amit Kumar Balyan, Sachin Ahuja, Umesh Kumar Lilhore, Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, Poongodi Manoharan, Abeer D. Algarni, Hela Elmannai, Kaamran Raahemifar

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverfittingComputer scienceParticle swarm optimizationIntrusion detection systemRandom forestSupport vector machineData miningArtificial intelligenceBenchmark (surveying)Machine learningFitness functionGenetic algorithmArtificial neural network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to the rapid growth in IT technology, digital data have increased availability, creating novel security threats that need immediate attention. An intrusion detection system (IDS) is the most promising solution for preventing malicious intrusions and tracing suspicious network behavioral patterns. Machine learning (ML) methods are widely used in IDS. Due to a limited training dataset, an ML-based IDS generates a higher false detection ratio and encounters data imbalance issues. To deal with the data-imbalance issue, this research develops an efficient hybrid network-based IDS model (HNIDS), which is utilized using the enhanced genetic algorithm and particle swarm optimization(EGA-PSO) and improved random forest (IRF) methods. In the initial phase, the proposed HNIDS utilizes hybrid EGA-PSO methods to enhance the minor data samples and thus produce a balanced data set to learn the sample attributes of small samples more accurately. In the proposed HNIDS, a PSO method improves the vector. GA is enhanced by adding a multi-objective function, which selects the best features and achieves improved fitness outcomes to explore the essential features and helps minimize dimensions, enhance the true positive rate (TPR), and lower the false positive rate (FPR). In the next phase, an IRF eliminates the less significant attributes, incorporates a list of decision trees across each iterative process, supervises the classifier's performance, and prevents overfitting issues. The performance of the proposed method and existing ML methods are tested using the benchmark datasets NSL-KDD. The experimental findings demonstrated that the proposed HNIDS method achieves an accuracy of 98.979% on BCC and 88.149% on MCC for the NSL-KDD dataset, which is far better than the other ML methods i.e., SVM, RF, LR, NB, LDA, and CART.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations256
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207