MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6945204976 · doi:10.22059/jitm.2022.89407

Implementation of Intrusion detection and prevention with Deep Learning in Cloud Computing

2023· article· en· W6945204976 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntrusion detection systemDeep learningBenchmark (surveying)Cloud computingNetwork securityRandom forestAutoencoderArtificial neural networkVariety (cybernetics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An administrator is employed to identify network security breaches in their organizations by using a Network Intrusion Detection and Prevention System (NIDPS), which is presented in this paper that can detect and preventing a wide range of well-known network attacks. It is now more important than ever to recognize different cyber-attacks and network abnormalities that build an effective intrusion detection system plays a crucial role in today's security. NSL-KDD benchmark data set is extensively used in literature, although it was created over a decade ago and will not reflect current network traffic and low-footprint attacks. Canadian Institute of Cyber security introduced a new data set, the CICIDS2017 network data set, which solved the NSL-KDD problem. With our approach, we can apply a variety of machine learning techniques like linear regression, Random Forest and ID3. The efficient IDPS is indeed implemented and tested in a network environment utilizing several machine learning methods. A model that simulates an IDS-IPS system by predicting whether a stream of network data is malicious or benign is our objective. An Enhanced ID3 is proposed in this study to identify abnormalities in network activity and classify them. For benchmark purposes, we also develop an auto encoder network, PCA, and K-Means Clustering. On CICIDS2017, a standard dataset for network intrusion, we apply Self-Taught Learning (STL), which is a deep learning approach. To compare, we looked at things like memory, Recall, Accuracy, and Precision.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.556

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.490
Teacher spread0.379 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207