MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Score-Based Unsupervised Anomaly Detection using Graph Clustering and the Activity and Event Network Model

2023· article· en· W4389543332 on OpenAlexaff
Amir Mohammadi Bagha, Isaac Woungang, Issa Traoré

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnomaly detectionComputer scienceCluster analysisData miningDenial-of-service attackEvent (particle physics)False positive rateArtificial intelligenceUnsupervised learningInsiderInsider threatConstant false alarm rateGraphMachine learningPattern recognition (psychology)Theoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Developing a real-time unsupervised anomaly detection system that is able to detect a broad range of attacks, including insider threats, distributed denial-of-service attacks, and Advanced Persistent Threats, among others, in real-time, is still a challenge. In this paper, a new anomaly detection scheme is proposed, which is based on the Activity and Event Network (AEN) framework, a new knowledge graph model that allows capturing the dynamicity and uncertainty inherent in network activities while providing a foundation for expressing various threat detection approaches. The considered unsupervised learning-based approach takes advantage of node clustering in the network to establish a normal behaviour for each cluster and detect the anomalies accordingly. Our proposed scheme is evaluated using the CIC 2018 IDS dataset, yielding a false positive rate (FPR) of 0.83% and a detection rate (DR) of 79%.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207