MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

New Machine Learning Approaches for Intrusion Detection in ADS-B

2025· article· W4416923505 on OpenAlexaff
Mikaëla Ngamboé, Jean-Simon Marrocco, Jean-Yves Ouattara, José M. Fernandez, Gabriela Nicolescu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicAir Traffic Management and Optimization
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntrusion detection systemInferenceDeep learningTransfer of learningLatency (audio)Protocol (science)GeneralizationEncoder

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the growing reliance on the vulnerable Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) protocol in air traffic management (ATM), ensuring security is critical. This study investigates emerging machine learning models and training strategies to improve AI-based intrusion detection systems (IDS) for ADS-B. Focusing on ground-based ATM systems, we evaluate two deep learning IDS implementations: one using a transformer encoder and the other an extended Long Short-Term Memory (xLSTM) network, marking the first xLSTM-based IDS for ADS-B. A transfer learning strategy was employed, involving pre-training on benign ADS-B messages and fine-tuning with labeled data containing instances of tampered messages. Results show this approach outperforms existing methods, particularly in identifying subtle attacks that progressively undermine situational awareness. The xLSTM-based IDS achieves an F1-score of 98.9 %, surpassing the transformer-based model at 94.3 %. Tests on unseen attacks validated the generalization ability of the xLSTM model. Inference latency analysis shows that the 7.26-second delay introduced by the xLSTM-based IDS fits within the Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR) refresh interval (5-12 s), although it may be restrictive for time-critical operations. While the transformer-based IDS achieves a 2.1 -second latency, it does so at the cost of lower detection performance.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score0.929

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAir Traffic Management and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207