MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deep Feature Extraction Framework Based on DNN for Enhancing Mirai Attachment Classification in Machine Learning

2023· article· en· W4400771743 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hasan Gharaibeh, Mohammad Aljaidi, Ahmad Nasayreh, Qais Al-Na’amneh, Ameera Jaradat, Ghassan Samara, Rabia Emhamed Al Mamlook

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFace and Expression Recognition
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFeature extractionArtificial intelligenceMachine learningArtificial neural networkDeep learningPattern recognition (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nowadays, the rapid growth of Internet of Things (IoT) devices has changed many parts of our lives by providing seamless connectivity and automation. However, this expansion has created new challenges and vulnerabilities, especially with regard to security. Mirai botnet, a strain of malware that has severely damaged the IoT ecosystem, is one of the prominent risks to IoT security. This research examines the impact of the Mirai botnet on IoT devices. In this study, we present a hybrid model to detect Mirai attacks. Deep neural networks (DNNs) are used to extract significant deep features, which are subsequently passed to the (Light Gradient Boosting Machine) LGBM algorithm for classification. A dataset from the Canadian Institute 2023 that included several kinds of Internet of Things assaults was used to assess the model. The model achieved excellent feature extraction and promising results with accuracy, recall, precision, and F1-score scoring up to 95 % for all. These accuracy results demonstrated the superior performance of the suggested model over competing techniques, which had scores of 71 %, 85%, and 52%, respectively, for Support Vector Machine (SVM), Light Gradient Boosting Machine (LGBM), and Stochastic Gradient Descent (SGD). Furthermore, the model outperforms the DNN model, which received a score of 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 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.290 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFace and Expression RecognitionFrench-language works237,207