Detecting Cyber Attacks In-Vehicle Diagnostics Using an Intelligent Multistage Framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The advanced technology of vehicles makes them vulnerable to external exploitation. The current trend of research is to impose security measures to protect vehicles from different aspects. One of the main problems that counter Intrusion Detection Systems (IDSs) is the necessity to have a low false acceptance rate (FA) with high detection accuracy without major changes in the vehicle network infrastructure. Furthermore, the location of IDSs can be controversial due to the limitations and concerns of Electronic Control Units (ECUs). Thus, we propose a novel framework of multistage to detect abnormality in vehicle diagnostic data based on specifications of diagnostics and stacking ensemble for various machine learning models. The proposed framework is verified against the KIA SOUL and Seat Leon 2018 datasets. Our IDS is evaluated against point anomaly attacks and period anomaly attacks that have not been used in its training. The results show the superiority of the framework and its robustness with high accuracy of 99.21%, a low false acceptance rate of 0.003%, and a good detection rate (DR) of 99.63% for Seat Leon 2018, and an accuracy of 99.22%, a low false acceptance rate of 0.005%, and good detection rate of 98.59% for KIA SOUL.
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".