2020
DOI: 10.1109/access.2020.3031892
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Network Intrusion Detection Based on Conditional Wasserstein Generative Adversarial Network and Cost-Sensitive Stacked Autoencoder

Abstract: In the field of intrusion detection, there is often a problem of data imbalance, and more and more unknown types of attacks make detection difficult. To resolve above issues, this paper proposes a network intrusion detection model called CWGAN-CSSAE, which combines improved conditional Wasserstein Generative Adversarial Network (CWGAN) and cost-sensitive stacked autoencoders (CSSAE). First of all, the CWGAN network that introduces gradient penalty and L2 regularization is used to generate specified minority at… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
(43 reference statements)
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For instance, SHIDS [36] used ISCX-UNB dataset for intrusion detection, hence it detects only trained anomalies using of single dataset it does not detect real-time anomalies because the attack behavior is changed frequently, but trained anomalies store only limited behavior thus leads to poor accuracy and less F-measure value. Table 9 illustrates the numerical analysis of F-score which represent the average value of F-score [42], [43]. The numerical analysis proved that the proposed 3LIDS-CGAN model achieves high F-score compared to existing models.…”
Section: Impact Of F-scorementioning
confidence: 96%
“…For instance, SHIDS [36] used ISCX-UNB dataset for intrusion detection, hence it detects only trained anomalies using of single dataset it does not detect real-time anomalies because the attack behavior is changed frequently, but trained anomalies store only limited behavior thus leads to poor accuracy and less F-measure value. Table 9 illustrates the numerical analysis of F-score which represent the average value of F-score [42], [43]. The numerical analysis proved that the proposed 3LIDS-CGAN model achieves high F-score compared to existing models.…”
Section: Impact Of F-scorementioning
confidence: 96%
“…Compared with the above methods, the accuracy, accuracy, and F1 of CWGAN-CSSAE in this model are improved by 3.63%, 1.31%, and 1.34%, respectively. Therefore, the detection model proposed in this paper has good detection and recognition performance [7][8] .…”
Section: Compare With Other Modelsmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…In [15], the LSTM and Autoencoder approach classify the attacks. In [16], an Adversarial autoencoder neural network is used for NIDS with the combination of GANs and various auto-encoders. GAN consists of two networks generator and a discriminator.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%