MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Analysis of the Generator Architectures and Loss Functions in Improving the Stability of GANs Training towards Efficient Intrusion Detection

2022· article· en· W4352981123 on OpenAlexaff
Raha Soleymanzadeh, Rasha Kashef

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscriminatorComputer scienceCross entropyGenerator (circuit theory)Mean squared errorBinary numberArtificial intelligenceBinary classificationStability (learning theory)Entropy (arrow of time)Intrusion detection systemPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningAlgorithmMathematicsDetectorStatisticsSupport vector machineTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Various research studies have been recently introduced in developing generative models, especially in computer vision and image classification. These models are inspired by a generator and discriminator network architecture in a min-max optimization game called Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs). However, GANs-based models suffer from training instability, which means high oscillations during the training, which provides inaccurate results. There are various causes beyond the instability behaviours, such as the adopted generator architecture, loss function, and distance metrics. In this paper, we focus on the impact of the generator architectures and the loss functions on the GANs training. We aim to provide a comparative assessment of various architectures focusing on ensemble and hybrid models and loss functions such as Focal loss, Binary Cross-Entropy and Mean Squared loss function. Experimental results on NSL-KDD and UNSW-NB15 datasets show that the ensemble models are more stable in terms of training and have higher intrusion detection rates. Additionally, the focal loss can improve the performance of detection minority classes. Using Mean squared loss improved the detection rate for discriminator, however with the Binary Cross entropy loss function, the deep features representation is improved and there is more stability in trends for all architectures.

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)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.616
Threshold uncertainty score0.720

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207