MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Dynamic learning framework for IoT intrusion detection using statistical approach and unsupervised learning.

2025· preprint· en· W4408311884 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamed Khalafalla Hassan, Sharifah H. S. Ariffin, Mutaz Hamad, Safa Elhadi, Bushra Mohammed Ali Abdalla

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnsupervised learningComputer scienceIntrusion detection systemArtificial intelligenceStatistical learningInternet of ThingsMachine learningComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Internet of Things (IoT) is increasingly becoming integral in various sectors like transportation and healthcare, driving the development of new services. This paper proposes an innovative security approach for IoT, utilizing feature selection, dynamic learning with statistical change detection, and Automated Machine Learning (AutoML) for ongoing model refinement. Applied to a comprehensive IoT dataset, this method effectively tackles feature drift in dynamic environments, underscoring the need for flexible cybersecurity tactics. It demonstrates the proposed framework’s role in transforming attack detection and classification in IoT. The testing involved 33 attacks on an IoT network with 105 devices. The results indicate that our methodology significantly improves classification performance by 8% to 67%, depending on the drift percentage.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection→French-language works237,207→