MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ai-Driven Cybersecurity Awareness Training (CSAT) Framework

2025· article· W7154464102 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Mohamed Ahmed, Mohamed Mejri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation and Cyber Security
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraining (meteorology)Government (linguistics)Key (lock)Component (thermodynamics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human error continues to be a prevailing cause of cybersecurity attacks, and it necessitates immediate responsive and personal training solutions. Conventional Cybersecurity Awareness Training (CSAT) schemes are generally contextually irrelevant, lack scalability, and are missing ongoing risk assessment. The paper will mitigate such shortcomings by suggesting a multi-phase CSAT model whereby Generative Artificial Intelligence (GAI), online machine learning algorithms, and MITRE ATT&CK- based threat models are incorporated to provide rolespecific and threat-sensitive delivery of cybersecurity education. The framework includes realtime user profiling, vulnerability analysis and a machine learning pipeline that includes Random Forest with Recursive Feature Elimination, Isolation Forest, K-Means clustering and Decision Trees to find out risks based on behavior. The dynamically generated training content is based on weaknesses that are unique to the users and the changing risk profiles between the users. Simulated organizational profiles with experimental evaluation indicate that there were significant changes of Risk Scores and Vulnerability Scores among partici-ants. This confirms the model as effective in increasing the awareness of the users, alleviating behavioral weaknesses, and facilitating ongoing learning. The suggested framework provides flexible and smart approach to reinforcing organizational cybersecurity postures and providing quantifiable and specific outcomes.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInformation and Cyber SecurityFrench-language works237,207