MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395464439 · doi:10.18280/isi.290212

Efficient Cybersecurity Assessment Using SVM and Fuzzy Evidential Reasoning for Resilient Infrastructure

2024· article· en· W4395464439 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Zaydon L. Ali, Wassan Saad Abduljabbar Hayale, Israa Al Barazanchi, Ravi Sekhar, Pritesh Shah, Sushma Parihar

Bibliographic record

VenueIngénierie des systèmes d information · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEvidential reasoning approachSupport vector machineFuzzy logicArtificial intelligenceResilience (materials science)Computer securityData miningMachine learningDecision support system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With current advancement in hybermedia knowledges, the privacy of digital information has developed a critical problem. To overawed the susceptibilities of present security protocols, scholars tend to focus mainly on efforts on alternation of current protocols. Over past decade, various proposed encoding models have been shown insecurity, leading to main threats against significant data. Utilizing the suitable encryption model is very vital means of guard against various such, but algorithm is selected based on the dependency of data which need to be secured. Moreover, testing potentiality of the security assessment one by one to identify the best choice can take a vital time for processing. For faster and precisive identification of assessment algorithm, we suggest a security phase exposure model for cipher encryption technique by invoking Support Vector Machine (SVM). In this work, we form a dataset using usual security components like contrast, homogeneity. To overcome the uncertainty in analysing the security and lack of ability of processing data to a risk assessment mechanism. To overcome with such complications, this paper proposes an assessment model for security issues using fuzzy evidential reasoning (ER) approaches. Significantly, the model can be utilised to process and assemble risk assessment data on various aspects in systematic ways. To estimate the performance of our framework, we have various analyses like, recall, F1 score and accuracy.

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 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 categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIngénierie des systèmes d informationSame topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207