MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

IoT Device and State Identification based on Usage Patterns

2024· article· en· W4405937840 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Malware Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsSolana Networks (Canada)Dalhousie University
FundersMitacs
KeywordsIdentification (biology)Computer scienceState (computer science)Internet of ThingsComputer securityProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we explore usage patterns for the identification of IoT devices and their corresponding states. Machine Learning (ML) methods are trained on IoT device traffic patterns to recognize the state that the device is in. Three device states are the focus of this study - Power-up, Idle and Active. Devices are visible and open to cyber attacks from the moment they are powered on. Previous studies have focused primarily on identifying IoT devices which are in the active state. This study advances the research domain by exploring all three states of an IoT device. Eight different ML algorithms are evaluated using three different feature sets extracted from device network traffic, using flow analysis tools - Tranalyzer2, NFStream and Zeek. They are rigorously assessed to accurately identify diverse IoT devices under normal operational conditions over the aforementioned three states. .

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Malware Detection TechniquesFrench-language works237,207