MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133051073

Application of Machine Learning in Program and Malware Analysis

2025· dissertation· W7133051073 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mingyue Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2025
Typedissertation
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Malware Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of TorontoGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsMalwarePath (computing)SoftwareConstraint (computer-aided design)RetrainingDomain (mathematical analysis)Concept driftMalware analysisEvasion (ethics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Program and malware analysis tools are important for computer security. Recently, machine learning has been applied to help with program and malware analysis. In this thesis, we investigate a few areas in which the application of machine learning can be used to improve program analysis. We find several cases where understanding the problem domain of program analysis can be more important than achieving raw machine learning capabilities on its own. The first application is symbolic analysis. We use path features instead of constraint features in related work to train models that predict whether paths are possible in symbolic analysis. These statistical path features can be applied without constraint collection. With these features, simple machine learning models are enough to save time, and their predictions can generalize across software applications. Also, we examine the sometimes complex interactions between factors such as model performance, design of symbolic analysis tool, distribution of path analysis time, and the algorithm that prioritizes and selects paths for symbolic analysis. We find that leveraging domain-specific knowledge about analyzed paths can achieve better time savings than improving model performance. Another application is malware classification. While machine learning models can detect malware, these models need to be frequently retrained to ensure they are up to date. Data drift detectors select drifting software samples into the datasets for retraining models, so model performance does not decrease significantly upon changes in software data. However, how malware samples can evade these data drift detectors during malware classification has not been studied. We examine how evasion and poisoning attacks work against data drift detectors and malware classifiers. We find how unique properties from the underlying models of the data drift detectors cause some attacks that work against malware classification to fail against data drift detection. With improper attack methods, a more capable attacker can even decrease the chance of attack success against data drift detection. Finally, we also propose a poisoning attack that properly works against one such data drift detector for retraining malware classifiers.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.358
Teacher spread0.349 · 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.

Study designOther design
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 venueTSpaceSame topicAdvanced Malware Detection TechniquesFrench-language works237,207