Cited by 5Software System Performance and ReliabilityAnomaly Detection Techniques and ApplicationsNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

HUMAN - Hierarchical Clustering for Unsupervised Anomaly Detection & Interpretation

Mulinka, Pavol, Casas, Pedro, Fukuda, Kensuke, Kencl, Lukas·2020·2020 11th International Conference on Network of the Future (NoF)

Abstract

The automatic detection and interpretation of network traffic anomalies through machine learning is a well-known problem, for which no general solution is available. Both supervised and unsupervised (i.e., anomaly detection) approaches require prior knowledge on the monitoring data, either in terms of normal operation profiles or on the specific anomalies to detect. As a consequence, both approaches have clear limitations when it comes to detecting, and in particular interpreting, previously unseen events. We present HUMAN, a general hierarchical-clustering-based approach for unsupervised network traffic analysis, which can both detect and interpret anomalous behaviors in a completely black-box manner, without relying on ground-truth on the system under analysis. HUMAN can detect and interpret complex patterns in the analyzed data, using a structural approach which exploits hierarchical cluster relationships and correlation among features. We describe the building blocks of HUMAN and explain its functioning in detail, using as case study the detection and interpretation of performance issues in major cloud platforms, through the unsupervised analysis of distributed active cloud latency measurements. The HUMAN approach can be applied to the unsupervised analysis of any kind of nested or hierarchically structured multi-dimensional data, showing the potential of hierarchical clustering for general unsupervised data analytics.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/nof50125.2020.9249194

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • The method in [148] provides visual explanations.

    “Provides visual explanations”

    From A Survey on Explainable Anomaly Detection (2024) · cites this paper as [148]

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 46

  1. 10.1007/s40595-016-0086-9 · DOI
  2. 10.1145/3359992.3366639 · DOI
  3. 10.1145/3068335 · DOI
  4. 10.1145/304182.304187 · DOI
  5. 10.1007/978-3-642-37456-2_14 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1109/ICDM.2001.989517 · DOI
  7. halkidi, 2015, Method-independent indices for cluster validation and estimating the number of clusters, Handbook of Cluster Analysis, 616
  8. 10.1137/1.9781611973440.96 · DOI
  9. vazquez, 2019, Absolute Cluster Validity, IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence
  10. 0, Monitis
  11. 0, L7-filter
  12. 10.1016/j.future.2013.02.011 · DOI
  13. 10.1016/j.comnet.2013.04.001 · DOI
  14. 10.1007/s00607-014-0398-5 · DOI
  15. palumbo, 2019, Characterizing Cloud-to-User Latency as Perceived by AWS and Azure'Users Spread over the Globe, IEEE GLOBECOM
  16. 10.1145/1541880.1541882 · DOI · Paper page
  17. ahmed, 2016, A survey of network anomaly detection techniques, Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 60, 19, 10.1016/j.jnca.2015.11.016 · DOI
  18. 10.1109/CNMT.2009.5374676 · DOI
  19. 10.1109/SURV.2008.080406 · DOI · Paper page
  20. 10.1145/3098593.3098594 · DOI
  21. 10.1007/s40745-015-0040-1 · DOI · Paper page
  22. 0, Nagios
  23. 10.1109/TETC.2014.2330519 · DOI
  24. 10.1186/s13174-018-0087-2 · DOI · Paper page
  25. 0, CACTI
  26. ester, 1996, A density-based algorithm for discovering clusters in large spatial databases with noise, KDD, 96, 226
  27. 0, Zabbix
  28. 0, Amazon CloudWatch
  29. 0, ThousandEyes
  30. 10.1109/CloudNet.2018.8549558 · DOI
  31. 0, Azure Monitor
  32. 10.1109/CloudNet.2013.6710568 · DOI
  33. 0, Fpc Flexible Procedures for Clustering
  34. 10.1109/CloudNet.2017.8071525 · DOI
  35. pedregosa, 2011, Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python, Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12, 2825
  36. 10.1016/j.comnet.2016.06.011 · DOI
  37. 10.1109/WiMOB.2017.8115784 · DOI
  38. 0, CLAudit Planetary-scale cloud latency auditing
  39. 10.23919/CNSM.2017.8255998 · DOI
  40. bellman, 2015, Adaptive Control Processes A Guided Tour, 2045
  41. 10.1109/TNSM.2016.2627340 · DOI
  42. 10.1109/IWCMC.2014.6906328 · DOI
  43. 10.1016/j.comcom.2012.01.016 · DOI
  44. 10.1023/A:1009745219419 · DOI
  45. 10.1007/3-540-28349-8_2 · DOI
  46. 10.21105/joss.00205 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Mulinka, P., Casas, P., Fukuda, K., & Kencl, L.
Affiliations
  • Czech Technical University in Prague (CZ)
  • AIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH (AT)
  • National Institute of Informatics (JP)
Venue
2020 11th International Conference on Network of the Future (NoF)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2020-10-12
Pages
132-140
OpenAlex
W3098856714
Cited by
5
References
2
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1
FWCI
0.63
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Conference on the Network of the Future (NOF) (publishedVersion)
Funders
Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (18H03237)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Software System Performance and Reliability
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Anomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Security and Intrusion Detection
Keywords
unsupervised anomaly detection, hierarchical clustering, network traffic analysis, anomaly interpretation, black-box analysis, feature correlation

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