MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412112579 · doi:10.4018/ijisp.384606

An Ontology-Based Approach for Zero-Day Information Security Threat Management

2025· article· en· W4412112579 on OpenAlexfundno aff
John Kennedy Otieno Odego, Kennedy Ogada, Dennis Kaburu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Information Security and Privacy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and TechnologyConsortium canadien en neurodégénérescence associée au vieillissementCisco Systems
KeywordsComputer scienceOntologyComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Zero Day security threats are diverse and manifest in many forms. Despite the growing number of zero day attacks, very little information about the kind of threat and how to defend against the threats is known by information security professionals. Signature based techniques and statistical based techniques have been seen to be less effective in handling Zero-day security threats (ZDST) since they require a new threat signature and threat profile to be learnt each time, meaning new signatures and profiles cannot be detected and behavior-based approaches have always resulted in many false positives in handling of zero-day security threats. The ZDST may result in disruptions of service, loss of data, loss of data integrity, corruption of data, systems malfunction, miscommunication, or other undesired effects on information systems. This research proposes an ontology-based approach for management of ZDST and evaluates its performance for use in detection and prevention of ZDST within the information security domain.

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 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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.946
Threshold uncertainty score0.630

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.009
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.256 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueInternational Journal of Information Security and PrivacySame topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207