MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7163744947 · doi:10.25163/ai.1110763

Hybrid CNN-LSTM Framework for Intelligent Cyber Attack Detection and Prevention in U.S. Critical Digital Infrastructure: A Comparative Machine Learning Evaluation on CSE-CIC-IDS2018

2025· article· W7163744947 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Md. Iqbal Hossan, Md. Serajul Kabir Chowdhury Rubel, Md. Arifur Rahman, B. M. Taslimul Haque

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ai ML DL · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntrusion detection systemDenial-of-service attackBoosting (machine learning)Artificial neural networkCyber-attackConvolutional neural networkDeep learningCyber-physical systemDeep packet inspection

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The accelerating digitization of United States critical infrastructure — spanning healthcare, finance, energy, transportation, and government services — has created an attack surface that traditional, signature-based intrusion detection systems are no longer equipped to defend. These legacy approaches fail predictably against zero-day exploits, distributed denial-of-service campaigns, botnets, and stealthy infiltration attacks precisely because they can only recognize threats they have already seen. Something more adaptive is needed. Methods: This study proposes and evaluates an intelligent cyber defense framework integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI), Machine Learning (ML), and Deep Learning (DL) to detect and classify cyber threats in real time. Using the CSE-CIC-IDS2018 benchmark dataset — a realistic, multi-vector network traffic corpus generated by the Canadian Institute for Cybersecurity — five model architectures were systematically compared: Random Forest, XGBoost, Support Vector Machine (SVM), Convolutional Neural Network (CNN), Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM), and a Hybrid CNN-LSTM model. The framework incorporated structured data preprocessing, feature engineering, class imbalance handling, and performance evaluation across accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, ROC-AUC, and false positive rate metrics. Results: Results demonstrate that all models achieved detection accuracy above 96%, with the Hybrid CNN-LSTM model reaching 99.1% accuracy, approximately 99.0% precision and recall, and the lowest false positive rate (~2.0%) among all tested architectures. Flow Duration, Packet Length, and Destination Port emerged as the most predictive features. The hybrid model's dual capacity for spatial feature extraction and temporal sequence learning explained its consistent performance advantage over single-architecture alternatives. Conclusion: These findings suggest that hybrid deep learning frameworks offer a meaningful and deployable improvement over conventional IDS approaches, though validation against post-2020 attack data and live network streams remains necessary before operational conclusions can be drawn.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.334 · 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
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 venueJournal of Ai ML DLSame topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207