A Federated Learning Architecture for Blockchain DDoS Attacks Detection
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rapid development of blockchain technology has led to a constant increase in its financial and technological value. However, this has also led to malicious attacks. Distributed denial-of-service attacks pose a considerable threat to blockchain technology out of many attacks due to its effectiveness and distributed nature. To protect the blockchain from DDoS attacks, researchers have proposed a large number of defensive schemes. However, these schemes are not well-suited for use in practical situations. In this work, we propose a DDoS attack detection scheme based on centralized federated learning, where multiple participating nodes locally train models and upload them to a central node for aggregation. Additionally, we propose a more suitable method for blockchain scenarios, using decentralized federated learning technology, where multiple nodes exchange models in a peer-to-peer manner to complete model training without a central server. We simulate DDoS attacks in blockchain and generate a large dataset by combining it with traditional network layer DDoS attack data to evaluate the effectiveness of our schemes. The experimental results show that the proposed schemes perform well in classification accuracy, demonstrating that our techniques can detect DDoS attacks effectively.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it