The DOI matches its DataCite record.
Explaining Tree Model Decisions in Natural Language for Network Intrusion Detection
Open accessAbstract
Network intrusion detection (NID) systems which leverage machine learning have been shown to have strong performance in practice when used to detect malicious network traffic. Decision trees in particular offer a strong balance between performance and simplicity, but require users of NID systems to have background knowledge in machine learning to interpret. In addition, they are unable to provide additional outside information as to why certain features may be important for classification. In this work, we explore the use of large language models (LLMs) to provide explanations and additional background knowledge for decision tree NID systems. Further, we introduce a new human evaluation framework for decision tree explanations, which leverages automatically generated quiz questions that measure human evaluators' understanding of decision tree inference. Finally, we show LLM generated decision tree explanations correlate highly with human ratings of readability, quality, and use of background knowledge while simultaneously providing better understanding of decision boundaries.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
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 cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Ziems et al. (2023) studies the interpretation of decision tree models in network intrusion detection (NID) systems. They convert the path and structure data of the decision tree into text format and provide it to LLMs to generate explanations. Moreover, LLMs provide additional background knowledge to help users understand why certain features are important in categorization.”
From When LLMs meet cybersecurity: a systematic literature review (2025) · cites this paper as Ziems et al. (2023)
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 20
- Biswanath Mukherjee, L Todd Heberlein, and Karl N Levitt. Network intrusion detection. IEEE network, 8(3):26-41, 1994.
- Wenke Lee, Salvatore J Stolfo, and Kui W Mok. A data mining framework for building intrusion detection models. In Proceedings of the 1999 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (Cat. No. 99CB36344), pages 120-132. IEEE, 1999.
- Wenbo Guo, Dongliang Mu, Jun Xu, Purui Su, Gang Wang, and Xinyu Xing. Lemna: Explaining deep learning based security applications. In proceedings of the 2018 ACM SIGSAC conference on computer and communications security, pages 364-379, 2018.
- Pieter Barnard, Nicola Marchetti, and Luiz A DaSilva. Robust network intrusion detection through explainable artificial intelligence (xai). IEEE Networking Letters, 4(3):167-171, 2022.
- Maonan Wang, Kangfeng Zheng, Yanqing Yang, and Xiujuan Wang. An explainable machine learning framework for intrusion detection systems. IEEE Access, 8:73127-73141, 2020.
- Gang Liu, Tong Zhao, Jiaxin Xu, Tengfei Luo, and Meng Jiang. Graph rationalization with environment-based augmentations. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pages 1069-1078, 2022.
- Marco Tulio Ribeiro, Sameer Singh, and Carlos Guestrin. "why should I trust you?": Explaining the predictions of any classifier. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, San Francisco, CA, USA, August 13-17, 2016, pages 1135-1144, 2016.
- Scott M Lundberg and Su-In Lee. A unified approach to interpreting model predictions. In I. Guyon, U. V. Luxburg, S. Bengio, H. Wallach, R. Fergus, S. Vishwanathan, and R. Garnett, editors, Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30, pages 4765-4774.
- Scott M. Lundberg, Gabriel Erion, Hugh Chen, Alex DeGrave, Jordan M. Prutkin, Bala Nair, Ronit Katz, Jonathan Himmelfarb, Nisha Bansal, and Su-In Lee. From local explanations to global understanding with explainable ai for trees. Nature Machine Intelligence, 2(1):2522- 5839, 2020.
- Jason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma, Fei Xia, Ed Chi, Quoc V Le, Denny Zhou, et al. Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 35:24824-24837, 2022.
- Xuezhi Wang, Jason Wei, Dale Schuurmans, Quoc Le, Ed Chi, Sharan Narang, Aakanksha Chowdhery, and Denny Zhou. Self-consistency improves chain of thought reasoning in language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.11171, 2022. · arXiv
- Shunyu Yao, Dian Yu, Jeffrey Zhao, Izhak Shafran, Thomas L Griffiths, Yuan Cao, and Karthik Narasimhan. Tree of thoughts: Deliberate problem solving with large language models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.10601, 2023. · arXiv
- Francisco Javier Chiyah Garcia, David A Robb, Xingkun Liu, Atanas Laskov, Pedro Patron, and Helen Hastie. Explainable autonomy: A study of explanation styles for building clear mental models. In 11th International Conference of Natural Language Generation 2018, pages 99-108. Association for Computational Linguistics, 2018.
- Konstantinos Gavriilidis, Andrea Munafo, Helen Hastie, Conlan Cesar, Michael DeFilippo, and Michael R Benjamin. Towards explaining autonomy with verbalised decision tree states. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.13985, 2022. · arXiv
- Vern Paxson. Bro: a system for detecting network intruders in real-time. Computer networks, 31(23-24):2435-2463, 1999.
- Anna L Buczak and Erhan Guven. A survey of data mining and machine learning methods for cyber security intrusion detection. IEEE Communications surveys & tutorials, 18(2):1153- 1176, 2015.
- R. A. Fisher. Iris. UCI Machine Learning Repository, 1988. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24432/C56C76. · DOI
- Mohanad Sarhan, Siamak Layeghy, Nour Moustafa, and Marius Portmann. Netflow datasets for machine learning-based network intrusion detection systems. In Big Data Technologies and Applications: 10th EAI International Conference, BDTA 2020, and 13th EAI Interna- tional Conference on Wireless Internet, WiCON 2020, Virtual Event, December 11, 2020, Proceedings 10, pages 117-135. Springer, 2021.
- F. Pedregosa, G. Varoquaux, A. Gramfort, V. Michel, B. Thirion, O. Grisel, M. Blondel, P. Prettenhofer, R. Weiss, V. Dubourg, J. Vanderplas, A. Passos, D. Cournapeau, M. Brucher, M. Perrot, and E. Duchesnay. Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 12:2825-2830, 2011.
- Vladimir Karpukhin, Barlas Oğuz, Sewon Min, Patrick Lewis, Ledell Wu, Sergey Edunov, Danqi Chen, and Wen-tau Yih. Dense passage retrieval for open-domain question answering. arXiv preprint arXiv:2004.04906, 2020. · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
When LLMs meet cybersecurity: a systematic literature review
Zhang, J., Bu, H., Wen, H., Liu, Y., Fei, H., Xi, R., Li, L., Yang, Y., Zhu, H., & Meng, D. (2025) · Cybersecurity · doi:10.1186/s42400-025-00361-w · Cited by 383
Beyzavi, H., Shiraskar, S., Albluwi, A., Albalawi, M., Rizk, D., Rizk, F., Rizk, P., Nehmetallah, G., Rizk, R., & Santosh, K. (2026) · 2026 IEEE Conference on Artificial Intelligence (CAI) · doi:10.1109/cai68641.2026.11536239
Metadata
- Authors
- Ziems, N., Liu, G., Flanagan, J., & Jiang, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Notre Dame (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2023
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2310.19658
- OpenAlex
- W4388110131
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 5
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Licence
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Office of Naval Research (N00014-22, N00014-22-1-2507, N00014)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Security and Intrusion Detection
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Adversarial Robustness in Machine Learning
- Keywords
- network intrusion detection, decision tree, explainable AI, large language models, LLM-generated explanations, human evaluation of explanations, quiz questions, readability, decision boundaries
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
