A Machine Learning Approach to Malware Detection Using Application Programming Interface Calls (MDAPI)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Today, all kinds of institutions and organizations depend on the Internet and information systems.They have been an inseparable part of human life.This brings out not only convenience, but also potentially devastating vulnerabilities.There are countless solutions for such risks and it is true that these solutions greatly contribute to security, but no effective solution has yet been found against Zero-Day malware.Zero-day malware is malicious software that has not yet been identified by competent authorities and is not classified as malicious software.A traditional malware detection tool can only detect previously detected software and classify it as malicious.Machine learning methods, which have proven effective in various domains, offer a promising approach to addressing Zero-Day malware.Throughout this study, a stable solution other than traditional methods have been investigated to overcome all kinds of malware.Instead of solutions consisting of complex, time-consuming and heterogeneous features (such as deleting/adding/changing files, monitoring registry records, or running processes) in various studies in the literature, a simple, low-time cost and stable solution with homogeneous features (only API calls) has been obtained.The 98.04% accuracy score shows that the method is quite successful.The importance of the study is having high accuracy using only API calls as features in malware detection.It has been realized that classical antivirus methods are no longer sufficient for combating malicious software.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".