Klasifikasi Malware Family menggunakan Metode k-Nearest Neighbor (k-NN)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Smartphone berbasis Android OS memiliki pengguna terbanyak saat ini karena nyaman untuk digunakan dan menawarkan berbagai fitur. Akibatnya, banyak developer malware yang menjadikan Android OS sebagai incaran utama. Setiap tahun,bermunculan jenis malware family baru yang belum dikenali. Banyak peneliti mengusulkan kerangka kerja penganalisis malware Android menggunakan teknik data mining untuk mengidentifikasi jenis malware family baru. Para peneliti memerlukan dataset Android inklusif untuk menilai penganalisis Android mereka. Pada tahun 2019, Canadian Institute for Cybersecurity (CIC) telah membuat sebuah dataset untuk umum yang diberi nama CICAndMal2019. Dataset ini dibuat dengan melakukan analisis statis dan dinamis pada smartphone yang sebenarnya. Hasil dari analisis tersebut kemudian dilakukan klasifikasi malware menggunakan matode random forest. Dalam klasifikasi malware family penelitian ini menghasilkan precision sebesar 61,2% dan recall sebesar 57,7%. Pada makalah ini, kami melakukan klasifikasi malware family dengan menggunakan dataset CICAndMal2019 menggunakan metode k-Nearest Neighbor ( k-NN ), hasilnya kami mendapatkan precision sebesar 83% dan recall sebesar 65%.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".