An Adaptive End-to-End IoT Security Framework Using Explainable AI and LLMs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The exponential growth of the Internet of Things (IoT) has significantly increased the complexity and volume of cybersecurity threats, necessitating the development of advanced, scalable, and interpretable security frameworks. This paper presents an innovative, comprehensive framework for real-time IoT attack detection and response that leverages Machine Learning (ML), Explainable AI (XAI), and Large Language Models (LLM). By integrating XAI techniques such as SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) and LIME (Local Interpretable Model-agnostic Explanations) with a model-independent architecture, we ensure our framework’s adaptability across various ML algorithms. Additionally, the incorporation of LLMs enhances the interpretability and accessibility of detection decisions, providing system administrators with actionable, human-understandable explanations of detected threats. Our end-to-end framework not only facilitates a seamless transition from model development to deployment but also represents a real-world application capability that is often lacking in existing research. Based on our experiments with the CIC-IOT-2023 dataset [1], Gemini and OPENAI LLMS demonstrate unique strengths in attack mitigation: Gemini offers precise, focused strategies, while OPENAI provides extensive, in-depth security measures. Incorporating SHAP and LIME algorithms within XAI provides comprehensive insights into attack detection, emphasizing opportunities for model improvement through detailed feature analysis, fine-tuning, and the adaptation of misclassifications to enhance accuracy.
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 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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.044 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".