4.7 Article

Centered Hyperspherical and Hyperellipsoidal One-Class Support Vector Machines for Anomaly Detection in Sensor Networks

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/TIFS.2010.2051543

关键词

Anomaly detection; distributed computing; information security; machine learning; outlier detection; security; support vector machines (SVMs); wireless sensor networks

资金

  1. ARC Research Network on Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks and Information Processing (ISSNIP)
  2. ARC Special Research Center for Ultra-Broadband Information Networks (CUBIN)
  3. Australian Research Council (ARC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Anomaly detection in wireless sensor networks is an important challenge for tasks such as intrusion detection and monitoring applications. This paper proposes two approaches to detecting anomalies from measurements from sensor networks. The first approach is a linear programming-based hyperellipsoidal formulation, which is called a centered hyperellipsoidal support vector machine (CESVM). While this CESVM approach has advantages in terms of its flexibility in the selection of parameters and the computational complexity, it has limited scope for distributed implementation in sensor networks. In our second approach, we propose a distributed anomaly detection algorithm for sensor networks using a one-class quarter-sphere support vector machine (QSSVM). Here a hypersphere is found that captures normal data vectors in a higher dimensional space for each sensor node. Then summary information about the hyperspheres is communicated among the nodes to arrive at a global hypersphere, which is used by the sensors to identify any anomalies in their measurements. We show that the CESVM and QSSVM formulations can both achieve high detection accuracies on a variety of real and synthetic data sets. Our evaluation of the distributed algorithm using QSSVM reveals that it detects anomalies with comparable accuracy and less communication overhead than a centralized approach.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据