MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366415335 · doi:10.3390/brainsci13040683

Analysis of IoT Security Challenges and Its Solutions Using Artificial Intelligence

2023· review· en· W4366415335 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Sciences · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlockchain Technology Applications and Security
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)Computer scienceInternet of ThingsComputer securityArtificial intelligenceDeep learningBig dataResource (disambiguation)Data science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Internet of Things (IoT) is a well-known technology that has a significant impact on many areas, including connections, work, healthcare, and the economy. IoT has the potential to improve life in a variety of contexts, from smart cities to classrooms, by automating tasks, increasing output, and decreasing anxiety. Cyberattacks and threats, on the other hand, have a significant impact on intelligent IoT applications. Many traditional techniques for protecting the IoT are now ineffective due to new dangers and vulnerabilities. To keep their security procedures, IoT systems of the future will need AI-efficient machine learning and deep learning. The capabilities of artificial intelligence, particularly machine and deep learning solutions, must be used if the next-generation IoT system is to have a continuously changing and up-to-date security system. IoT security intelligence is examined in this paper from every angle available. An innovative method for protecting IoT devices against a variety of cyberattacks is to use machine learning and deep learning to gain information from raw data. Finally, we discuss relevant research issues and potential next steps considering our findings. This article examines how machine learning and deep learning can be used to detect attack patterns in unstructured data and safeguard IoT devices. We discuss the challenges that researchers face, as well as potential future directions for this research area, considering these findings. Anyone with an interest in the IoT or cybersecurity can use this website's content as a technical resource and reference.

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.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score0.744

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.314
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.094 · 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