Retracted: Intrusion Detection System for IoT Based on Modified Random Forest Algorithm
Post-publication record
OpenAlex flags this work as retracted, but it carries no matching Retraction Watch record in this frame.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An intrusion detection system (IDS) is key to having a comprehensive cybersecurity solution against any attack, and artificial intelligence techniques have been combined with all the features of the IoT to improve security. In response to this, in this research, an IDS technique driven by a modified random forest algorithm has been formulated to improve the system for IoT. To this end, the target is made as one-hot encoding, bootstrapping with less redundancy, adding a hybrid features selection method into the random forest algorithm, and modifying the ranking stage in the random forest algorithm. Furthermore, three datasets have been used in this research, IoTID20, UNSW-NB15, and IoT-23. The results are compared with the three datasets mentioned above and it emerges that the accuracy of the proposed system is 96.2%, which is better than the other methods in the IoTID20 Dataset, while the accuracy with the second dataset UNSW-NB15 yielded 98.85%. Lastly, using the third dataset, IoT-23, the suggested technique achieved 99.93%.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".