MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395704701 · doi:10.18280/ijsse.140215

Cross-Platform Malware Classification: Fusion of CNN and GRU Models

2024· article· en· W4395704701 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nagababu Pachhala, S. Jothilakshmi, Bhanu Prakash Battula

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Safety and Security Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Malware Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMalwareComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective cross-platform malware categorization techniques are becoming more and more necessary as malware spreads across more systems.Conventional methods are primarily concerned with the static or dynamic aspects of malware, which often restricts their ability to identify and categorize malware on various operating systems.In this paper, we use both static and dynamic characteristics to present a unique deep learning-based method for cross-platform malware classification.Our work aims to identify the distinct features of malware on different operating systems, such as Windows, macOS, Android, and iOS.We provide a complete depiction of malware behavior by collecting both dynamic and static data, such as system calls and network traffic patterns, as well as file properties, API calls, and header information.Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) and Gated Recurrent Units (GRU) are two components of our deep learning architecture that we use to address the inherent issues of cross-platform malware categorization.This fusion of networks enables us to effectively capture both spatial and temporal patterns present in malware samples, enhancing the accuracy of classification across platforms.To evaluate the performance of our proposed model, we employ benchmark datasets encompassing diverse malware families across different operating systems.The results demonstrate superior classification accuracy, precision, recall, and F-score compared to traditional machine learning approaches and single-feature-based models.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.928
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.255 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Safety and Security EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Malware Detection TechniquesFrench-language works237,207