2022 45th Jubilee International Convention on Information, Communication and Electronic Technology (MIPRO) 2022
DOI: 10.23919/mipro55190.2022.9803674
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Network traffic verification based on a public dataset for IDS systems and machine learning classification algorithms

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This discrimination threshold line is presented in 45-degree red diagonal line in Figure 10b,d. The AUC values closer to 1 emphasize better classification capability, whereas results at 0.5 indicate the model's poor capability to classify the data points [39]. By observing the AUC score, the improvement from the Diagnostics validation (AUC = 0.774) (Figure 10b) to the Comparative validation (AUC = 0.928) (Figure 10d) is generally comparable due to inclusion of DS2 data; thus, showing the model's above average increase in classification capability with the help of simulated (SN and SA) x6 torque data.…”
Section: Comparative-validation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This discrimination threshold line is presented in 45-degree red diagonal line in Figure 10b,d. The AUC values closer to 1 emphasize better classification capability, whereas results at 0.5 indicate the model's poor capability to classify the data points [39]. By observing the AUC score, the improvement from the Diagnostics validation (AUC = 0.774) (Figure 10b) to the Comparative validation (AUC = 0.928) (Figure 10d) is generally comparable due to inclusion of DS2 data; thus, showing the model's above average increase in classification capability with the help of simulated (SN and SA) x6 torque data.…”
Section: Comparative-validation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Examples of instances include [17], where the F1-score remains suboptimal, indicating the model is not achieving adequate performance on the minority class, even though overall accuracy appears high. In a study employing the UNSW-NB15 dataset [11], even though the dataset is multiclass imbalanced, the primary emphasis lies on presenting overall performance rather than individual class results. The findings demonstrate that Random Forest attains the best Area Under the Curve (AUC) and F2 scores.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, a comprehensive investigation is needed to identify the high-performance algorithm that overcomes the imbalanced class distribution in the absence of sampling methods to rebalance the distribution. Additionally, the limited reporting of individual class results, as observed in [11], poses a gap in our understanding of algorithmic vulnerabilities and strengths across diverse attack types. Lastly, despite extensive algorithm testing, a systematic exploration of the suitability of different machine learning algorithm families for multiclass imbalanced datasets is lacking.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation