MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394913992 · doi:10.3390/computers13040103

Continuous Authentication in the Digital Age: An Analysis of Reinforcement Learning and Behavioral Biometrics

2024· article· en· W4394913992 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputers · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiometricsReinforcementReinforcement learningAuthentication (law)Computer scienceInternet privacyComputer securityArtificial intelligencePsychologyHuman–computer interactionSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research article delves into the development of a reinforcement learning (RL)-based continuous authentication system utilizing behavioral biometrics for user identification on computing devices. Keystroke dynamics are employed to capture unique behavioral biometric signatures, while a reward-driven RL model is deployed to authenticate users throughout their sessions. The proposed system augments conventional authentication mechanisms, fortifying them with an additional layer of security to create a robust continuous authentication framework compatible with static authentication systems. The methodology entails training an RL model to discern atypical user typing patterns and identify potentially suspicious activities. Each user’s historical data are utilized to train an agent, which undergoes preprocessing to generate episodes for learning purposes. The environment involves the retrieval of observations, which are intentionally perturbed to facilitate learning of nonlinear behaviors. The observation vector encompasses both ongoing and summarized features. A binary and minimalist reward function is employed, with principal component analysis (PCA) utilized for encoding ongoing features, and the double deep Q-network (DDQN) algorithm implemented through a fully connected neural network serving as the policy net. Evaluation results showcase training accuracy and equal error rate (EER) ranging from 94.7% to 100% and 0 to 0.0126, respectively, while test accuracy and EER fall within the range of approximately 81.06% to 93.5% and 0.0323 to 0.11, respectively, for all users as encoder features increase in number. These outcomes are achieved through RL’s iterative refinement of rewards via trial and error, leading to enhanced accuracy over time as more data are processed and incorporated into the system.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.666
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.307 · 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