2021 International Conference on Computer Communication and Informatics (ICCCI) 2021
DOI: 10.1109/iccci50826.2021.9457024
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Intrusion Detection System using MLP and Chaotic Neural Networks

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The results showed that all the evaluated models reached high F1-scores. For example the model proposed in [3,15] reached respectively 0.998 and 0.99, the two benchmark models described in [8,17] achieved respectively, 0.996 and 0.989. As a matter of fact, the high performance of all these models indicates either the triviality of the intrusion detection task, which is clearly not true, or an inappropriate evaluation procedure.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The results showed that all the evaluated models reached high F1-scores. For example the model proposed in [3,15] reached respectively 0.998 and 0.99, the two benchmark models described in [8,17] achieved respectively, 0.996 and 0.989. As a matter of fact, the high performance of all these models indicates either the triviality of the intrusion detection task, which is clearly not true, or an inappropriate evaluation procedure.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The performance metrics used in this study are accuracy, precision, recall, and f1-Score, based on the research from [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], and [12]. Accuracy is the percentage of samples that are correctly classified above the total number of samples.…”
Section: Performance Metricsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The metrics consist of accuracy, precision, FPR, and FNR. The result is that the hybrid value from MLP and Chaotic Neural Network has higher accuracy (99.21% and 94.8%) and precision (99.91% and 90.3%), and lower FPR (0.00401 and 0.00478) and FNR (0.00213 and 0.00233) from MLP itself [12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Conventional approaches frequently find it difficult to keep up with the constantly shifting characteristics of cyber threats, particularly in the ever-changing financial industry. The article presents a novel framework that combines the discriminative strength of MLP [9] networks with the feature learning abilities of auto encoders in order to handle this difficulty. Our goal is to increase detection accuracy by utilizing labelled information and capturing intricate patterns in the data through the integration of these two methods into a hybrid model.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%