MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399666315 · doi:10.1109/tnsm.2024.3414305

ENIDS: A Deep Learning-Based Ensemble Framework for Network Intrusion Detection Systems

2024· article· en· W4399666315 on OpenAlexaff
Ibrahim Mohammed Sayem, Moinul Islam Sayed, Sajal Saha, Anwar Haque

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceIntrusion detection systemEnsemble learningDeep learningArtificial intelligenceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rapid and widespread adoption of emerging Information Technology (IT) infrastructures and services in commercial and private endeavors opens new horizons for novel cyberattacks. Network Intrusion Detection Systems (NIDS) gained attention as an effective means of combating various cyber threats. Recent research demonstrates the potency of machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) approaches in the development of NIDS. In this paper, we propose a DL-based framework called the Ensemble Framework for Network Intrusion Detection System (ENIDS) to detect various types of cyberattacks, which includes dynamic data pre-processing, optimal feature selection, the handling of imbalanced data samples, and a DL-based ensemble model. Our DL-based ensemble model is comprised of two layers: the base learner and the meta-learner. The base learner is composed of three robust DL models: convolutional neural networks (CNN), long short-term memory (LSTM), and gated recurrent units (GRU), and the meta-learner is a deep neural network (DNN) model. The proposed framework experimented with two publicly available and popular network traffic datasets, namely UNSW-15 and CICIDS-2017. In the UNSW-15 and CICIDS-2017 datasets, our proposed framework detects cyberattacks with an accuracy of 90.6% and 99.6% and an F1-score of 90.5% and 99.6%, respectively. According to experimental findings, the proposed ensemble framework outperforms existing state-of-the-art approaches and demonstrates better performance than benchmark DL methods in terms of accuracy, F1-score, and execution time for training and testing.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.227
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations28
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Network and Service ManagementSame topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207