MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408639493 · doi:10.1080/19393555.2025.2479027

Exploring the role of behavioral analytics and anomaly detection in securing mobile networks for critical infrastructure

2025· article· en· W4408639493 on OpenAlexaff
Ch. Gangadhar, Rahul Mapari, Anil Kumar Muthevi, Akula Suneetha, Santhosh Krishna B V, B. Mouleswararao

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation Security Journal A Global Perspective · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsHorizon College and Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnomaly detectionComputer scienceAnalyticsComputer securityCritical infrastructureData scienceInternet privacyData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile networks have an ever-increasing presence in critical infrastructure, enabling just-in-time monitoring and real-time control in various domains, from energy and transport to healthcare. However, the security of these systems is now vulnerable to new cybersecurity threats from this integration. Evaluating the potential of behavioral analytics and anomaly detection in securing mobile networks for critical infrastructure. This paper presents a novel Multi-Layer Adaptive Anomaly Detection System (MAADS) that utilizes recent advances in machine learning (ML) to identify anomalies and detect novel threats in mobile networks. MAADS detects anomalies in mobile networks across three layers: network traffic, user mobility, and device behavior. It does this through privacy-preserving data collection, multi-model anomaly detection, and an adaptive response framework. The empirical evaluation of the proposed system shows that MAADS can detect anomalies with 95% precision and 93% recall. It is demonstrated to identify 87% of anomalies not detected by standard ML-based systems. It also maintains its performance up to 100,000 nodes and consistently performs across other critical infrastructure sectors. The analysis and comparison of MAADS with existing solutions show that it outperforms existing techniques in terms of the ability to adapt to novel threats and the explainability of the detected anomalies.

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)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.280
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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 venueInformation Security Journal A Global PerspectiveSame topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207