Intrusion Detection in the IoT Under Data and Concept Drifts: Online Deep Learning Approach
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Although the existing machine learning-based intrusion detection systems in the Internet of Things (IoT) usually perform well in static environments, they struggle to preserve their performance over time, in dynamic environments. Yet, the IoT is a highly dynamic and heterogeneous environment, leading to what is known as data drift and concept drift. Data drift is a phenomenon which embodies the change that happens in the relationships among the independent features, which is mainly due to changes in the data quality over time. Concept drift is a phenomenon which depicts the change in the relationships between input and output data in the machine learning model over time. To detect data and concept drifts, we first propose a drift detection technique that capitalizes on the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) method to study the change in the variance of the features across the intrusion detection data streams. We also discuss an online outlier detection technique that identifies the outliers that diverge both from historical and temporally close data points. To counter these drifts, we discuss an online deep neural network that dynamically adjusts the sizes of the hidden layers based on the Hedge weighting mechanism, thus enabling the model to steadily learn and adapt as new intrusion data come. Experiments conducted on an IoT based intrusion detection dataset suggest that our solution stabilizes the performance of the intrusion detection on both the training and testing data…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
IoT devices and networks are highly vulnerable to security attacks that target data integrity and service availability.
“Unfortunately, IoT devices and networks are known to be highly vulnerable to security attacks that target data integrity and service availability.”
From Deep learning-enabled anomaly detection for IoT systems (2023) · cites this paper as [5]
The DS2OS dataset has been used in many state-of-the-art papers such as [5,52].
“The dataset has been used in many state-of-the-art papers such as [5,52].”
From Deep learning-enabled anomaly detection for IoT systems (2023) · cites this paper as [5]
Cites
A decision-theoretic generalization of on-line learning and an application to boosting
Freund, Y., & Schapire, R. E. (1997) · Journal of Computer and System Sciences · doi:10.1006/jcss.1997.1504 · Cited by 20,466 · see citing works
A survey on concept drift adaptation
Gama, J., Žliobaitė, I., Bifet, A., Pechenizkiy, M., & Bouchachia, A. (2014) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/2523813 · Cited by 3,735 · see citing works
A Survey of Machine and Deep Learning Methods for Internet of Things (IoT) Security
Al-Garadi, M. A., Mohamed, A., Al-Ali, A. K., Du, X., Ali, I., & Guizani, M. (2020) · IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · doi:10.1109/comst.2020.2988293 · Cited by 1,392 · see citing works
Digital selection and analogue amplification coexist in a cortex-inspired silicon circuit
Hahnloser, R. H. R., Sarpeshkar, R., Mahowald, M. A., Douglas, R. J., & Seung, H. S. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35016072 · Cited by 1,293 · see citing works
Analyzing Adversarial Attacks against Deep Learning for Intrusion Detection in IoT Networks
Ibitoye, O., Shafiq, O., & Matrawy, A. (2019) · 2019 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM) · doi:10.1109/globecom38437.2019.9014337 · Cited by 281 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Deep learning-enabled anomaly detection for IoT systems
Abusitta, A., de Carvalho, G. H. S., Wahab, O. A., Halabi, T., Fung, B. C. M., & Mamoori, S. A. (2023) · Internet of Things · doi:10.1016/j.iot.2022.100656 · Cited by 184 · see citing works
Self-citationA survey on explainable artificial intelligence for cybersecurity
Rjoub, G., Bentahar, J., Abdel Wahab, O., Mizouni, R., Song, A., Cohen, R., Otrok, H., & Mourad, A. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management · doi:10.1109/tnsm.2023.3282740 · Cited by 158 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Abdel Wahab, O.
- Affiliations
- Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Université du Québec en Outaouais, Gatineau, QC, Canada
- ORCID
- Abdel Wahab, Omar
- Venue
- IEEE Internet of Things Journal
- Published
- 2022-10-15
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 20
- Pages
- 19706-19716
- ISSN
- 2327-4662 (ISSN-L)
- 2372-2541
- OpenAlex
- W4226125749
- Cited by
- 190
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 46 · 2025: 52 · 2024: 43 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 8
- FWCI
- 15.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE Internet of Things Journal (publishedVersion)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- PolyPublie (École Polytechnique de Montréal) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (RGPIN-2020-04707)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Security and Intrusion Detection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Data Stream Mining Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Internet Traffic Analysis and Secure E-voting
- Keywords
- intrusion detection, Internet of Things, data drift, concept drift, online learning, drift detection, principal component analysis, outlier detection, data streams
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