MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Generative Adversarial Networks for Robust Anomaly Detection in Noisy IoT Environments

2024· article· en· W4402159528 on OpenAlexaff
Adel Abusitta, Talal Halabi, Ahmed Saleh Bataineh, Mohammad Zulkernine

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityUniversité LavalPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdversarial systemComputer scienceAnomaly detectionGenerative grammarArtificial intelligenceInternet of ThingsAnomaly (physics)Machine learningPattern recognition (psychology)Computer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Internet of Things (IoT) enables us to collect and process vast amounts of data in real time. However, the security of IoT devices and networks is highly susceptible to cyber attacks that threaten data integrity and service availability. Furthermore, due to the diverse nature of data collected from numerous nodes in IoT systems and the disturbances occurring within them, detecting anomalous activities and compromised nodes is considerably more challenging than in conventional computer systems. Therefore, it is crucial to develop robust and dependable anomaly detection methods to identify and remove malicious and/or unwanted data, which ensures their exclusion from IoT-powered applications and data analytics. To achieve this, this paper proposes a Generative Adverserial Networks (GAN)-based anomaly detection for IoT systems. The proposed model enables the autoencoder - using the adversarial training of GAN - to learn a better representation of IoT data, making it robust against noisy and changing environments. Based on experiments with real-world IoT datasets, the proposed framework has shown to improve the accuracy of detecting malicious traffic in IoT and surpass state-of-the-art anomaly detection 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.875
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207