Cited by 33Adversarial Robustness in Machine LearningInformation and Cyber SecurityNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection

The paradigm of hallucinations in AI-driven cybersecurity systems: Understanding taxonomy, classification outcomes, and mitigations

Sood, Aditya K, Zeadally, Sherali, Hong, EenKee·2025·Computers and Electrical Engineering

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.compeleceng.2025.110307

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Sood, A. K., Zeadally, S., & Hong, E.
Affiliations
University of Kentucky (US)
Corresponding author
Zeadally, Sherali
Venue
Computers and Electrical Engineering
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-05
Volume
124
Pages
110307
ISSN
0045-7906 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4409198830
Cited by
33
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 11
FWCI
10.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computers & Electrical Engineering (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information and Cyber Security
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Security and Intrusion Detection
Keywords
hallucinations, large language models, artificial intelligence in cybersecurity, hallucination taxonomy, threat detection, hallucination mitigation, human oversight, trust in automation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review