Cited by 165Internet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-votingNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionNetwork Packet Processing and Optimization

Machine learning algorithms for accurate flow-based network traffic classification: Evaluation and comparison

Open access
Soysal, Murat, Schmidt, Ece Guran·2010·Performance Evaluation

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.peva.2010.01.001

Cites

46 of 46 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
Soysal, M., & Schmidt, E. G.
Affiliations
Turkish Academic Network and Information Center (TR)
Venue
Performance Evaluation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-06
Volume
67
Issue
6
Pages
451-467
ISSN
0166-5316 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2075932300
Cited by
165
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 8
FWCI
11.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Performance Evaluation (publishedVersion)
  • OpenMETU (Middle East Technical University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Internet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-voting
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Security and Intrusion Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Hardware and Architecture › Network Packet Processing and Optimization
Keywords
network traffic classification, flow-based classification, Bayesian networks, decision tree, multilayer perceptron, peer-to-peer traffic, training data size, mislabeled training data, network monitoring

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