Cited by 12Network Security and Intrusion DetectionInternet of Things and AIArtificial Immune Systems Applications

A Lightweight Intrusion Detection System for Internet of Things: Clustering and Monte Carlo Cross-Entropy Approach

Open access
Almalawi, Abdulmohsen·2025·Sensors

Abstract

Our modern lives are increasingly shaped by the Internet of Things (IoT), as IoT devices monitor and manage everything from our homes to our workplaces, becoming an essential part of health systems and daily infrastructure. However, this rapid growth in IoT has introduced significant security challenges, leading to increased vulnerability to cyber attacks. To address these challenges, machine learning-based intrusion detection systems (IDSs)-traditionally considered a primary line of defense-have been deployed to monitor and detect malicious activities in IoT networks. Despite this, these IDS solutions often struggle with the inherent resource constraints of IoT devices, including limited computational power and memory. To overcome these limitations, we propose an approach to enhance intrusion detection efficiency. First, we introduce a recursive clustering method for data condensation, integrating compactness and entropy-driven sampling to select a highly representative subset from the larger dataset. Second, we adopt a Monte Carlo Cross-Entropy approach combined with a stability metric of features to consistently select the most stable and relevant features, resulting in a lightweight, efficient, and high-accuracy IoT-based IDS. Evaluation of our proposed approach on three IoT datasets from real devices (N-BaIoT, Edge-IIoTset, CICIoT2023) demonstrates comparable classification accuracy while significantly reducing training and testing times by 45× and 15×, respectively, and lowering memory usage by 18×, compared to competitor approaches.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/s25072235

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Detectors that achieve >99% accuracy on a single dataset routinely lose 10-20 percentage points when transferred cross-dataset.

    “detectors that achieve >99% accuracy on a single dataset routinely lose 10-20 percentage points when transferred cross-dataset”

    From Agentic AI and Large Language Models for Autonomous IoT Cybersecurity: A Systematic Survey, Taxonomy, and Research Roadmap (2026) · cites this paper as [77]

    Section 5 compares full, condensed, and feature-selected versions of each dataset, not detectors trained on one dataset and tested on another. The Section 5.1 passages report class-specific changes in precision and recall, but do not establish a routine 10–20 percentage-point loss in cross-dataset accuracy. Searches for cross-dataset transfer and training on one dataset while testing on another found no supporting passage; page numbers were unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [35]Cover T.M. Thomas J.A. Entropy, Relative Entropy, and Mutual Information Wiley-Interscience Hoboken, NJ, USA 1991 Volume 2 12 13
  2. [38]Vapnik V. The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory Springer Science & Business Media Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany 2013
  3. [39]Russell S. Norvig P. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach Pearson Boston, MA, USA 2016
  4. [40]Quinlan J.R. C4.5: Programs for Machine Learning Elsevier Amsterdam, The Netherlands 2014

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Almalawi, A.
Affiliations
King Abdulaziz University (SA)
Corresponding author
Almalawi, Abdulmohsen
Venue
Sensors
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2025-04-02
Volume
25
Issue
7
Pages
2235
ISSN
1424-8220 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4409109961
Cited by
10
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 4
FWCI
4.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Sensors (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Deanship of Scientific Research (DSR), King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah (G: 464-611-1443)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Security and Intrusion Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Internet of Things and AI
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Artificial Immune Systems Applications
Keywords
intrusion detection, Internet of Things security, lightweight machine learning, recursive clustering, data condensation, feature selection, feature stability, resource-constrained devices, N-BaIoT, Edge-IIoTset, CICIoT2023

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