2021 2nd International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communication, Embedded and Secure Systems (ACCESS) 2021
DOI: 10.1109/access51619.2021.9563297
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Ensemble-Based Filter Feature Selection Technique for Building Flow-Based IDS

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…By comparing the swarm intelligence search algorithms such as GA [32] and CFS [28], the method in this paper achieves a higher accuracy and higher false alarm rate than these two methods. In comparison with the ensemble feature selection strategies such as SCM3 [21], CPM [39], and EFW [40], these three methods achieve 99.88%, 99.16%, and 99.25% accuracy, respectively, while the accuracy of this paper reaches 99.92%, relative to the F1 value of 99.17% achieved by the CPM method, which achieves an F1 value of 99.92%.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 73%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…By comparing the swarm intelligence search algorithms such as GA [32] and CFS [28], the method in this paper achieves a higher accuracy and higher false alarm rate than these two methods. In comparison with the ensemble feature selection strategies such as SCM3 [21], CPM [39], and EFW [40], these three methods achieve 99.88%, 99.16%, and 99.25% accuracy, respectively, while the accuracy of this paper reaches 99.92%, relative to the F1 value of 99.17% achieved by the CPM method, which achieves an F1 value of 99.92%.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 73%
“…On the UNSW-NB15 dataset, the accuracy was 98.8%. Karna et al [39] used mutual information, Chi-square, and Pearson correlation coefficients to combine a more stable subset of features. It achieved 99.16% accuracy on the CIC-IDS2017 dataset using 25 features.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The proposed ensemble classifier technique of [ 47 ] achieved 86.5% accuracy, while model presented in [ 66 ] achieved 99.86% accuracy. Other techniques that were proposed in [ 25 , 34 , 48 , 49 ], received, 97.72%, 99.89%, 99.95%, and 98.62%accuracy, while our proposed scheme is 99.98% accurate during the classification. The reported FPR using the CIC-IDS2017 dataset is 0.12 and 0.013, acquired by techniques proposed in [ 25 , 34 ], which is further reduced to 0.00012 by our proposed ensemble classifier.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…They tested the proposed scheme using the MAWILab and CIC-IDS2017 dataset and the technique achieved 86.50% accuracy. Furthermore, Karna et al presented a filter-based selection technique and used an ensemble classifier that was composed of DT, RT, and ET algorithms [ 48 ]. This technique was tested for NSL-KDD and CIC-IDS2017 and achieved 99.51% accuracy.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%