MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stackelberg Security Game with Reinforcement Learning for Defending Video Servers Against APT Attacks

2025· article· W7127990925 on OpenAlexaff
Aws Jaber, Giordano Colò, Gudmund Grov, Angel Genchev

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersEuropean Defence Fund
KeywordsReinforcement learningServerEmulationIntrusion detection systemStackelberg competitionEvasion (ethics)ScalabilityGame theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs) pose a significant challenge for video servers in critical infrastructures. APT attacks tend to be multi-stage, difficult to attack for traditional intrusion detection systems (IDS) with advanced evasion techniques to evade modern machine learning-based defences. To address these challenges, we introduce SSG-RL. This hybrid defence framework integrates Stackelberg Security Game (SSG), Advantage Actor-Critic Reinforcement Learning (A2C) and a Risk-Rank (RR) algorithm, implemented within a Network Digital Twin (NDT) using the Cyber Security Learning Environment (CSLE). SSG-RL jointly models attacker tactics and defender strategies, enabling proactive responses mapped to the common MITRE ATT&CK and MITRE D3FEND frameworks. Validated using emulation traces from an external testbed, we demonstrate that SSG-RL enhances detection accuracy and reduces response latency compared to three baseline techniques: one that utilises a traditional IDS and two reinforcement learning approaches (DQN and PPO). These results highlight the potential of combining game-theoretic foresight with adaptive learning for scalable cyber defence.

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)0.005
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.250
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
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 topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207