MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387373041 · doi:10.3390/electronics12194142

Predicting DDoS Attacks Using Machine Learning Algorithms in Building Management Systems

2023· article· en· W4387373041 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDenial-of-service attackComputer scienceSupport vector machineMachine learningArtificial intelligenceBotnetArtificial neural networkComputer securityVulnerability (computing)Internet of ThingsAlgorithmThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid growth of the Internet of Things (IoT) in smart buildings necessitates the continuous evaluation of potential threats and their implications. Conventional methods are increasingly inadequate in measuring risk and mitigating associated hazards, necessitating the development of innovative approaches. Cybersecurity systems for IoT are critical not only in Building Management System (BMS) applications but also in various aspects of daily life. Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks targeting core BMS software, particularly those launched by botnets, pose significant risks to assets and safety. In this paper, we propose a novel algorithm that combines the power of the Slime Mould Optimization Algorithm (SMOA) for feature selection with an Artificial Neural Network (ANN) predictor and the Support Vector Machine (SVM) algorithm. Our enhanced algorithm achieves an outstanding accuracy of 97.44% in estimating DDoS attack risk factors in the context of BMS. Additionally, it showcases a remarkable 99.19% accuracy in predicting DDoS attacks, effectively preventing system disruptions, and managing cyber threats. To further validate our work, we perform a comparative analysis using the K-Nearest Neighbor Classifier (KNN), which yields an accuracy rate of 96.46%. Our model is trained on the Canadian Institute for Cybersecurity (CIC) IoT Dataset 2022, enabling behavioral analysis and vulnerability testing on diverse IoT devices utilizing various protocols, such as IEEE 802.11, Zigbee-based, and Z-Wave.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.244 · 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