4.6 Article

Weighted heterogeneous ensemble for the classification of intrusion detection using ant colony optimization for continuous search spaces

期刊

SOFT COMPUTING
卷 27, 期 8, 页码 4779-4793

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00500-022-07612-9

关键词

Heterogeneous ensemble; Weighted majority voting; K-nearest neighbor; Artificial neural networks; Naive Bayes; Ant colony optimization for continuous search spaces

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper proposes a heterogeneous ensemble classifier configuration for a multiclass intrusion detection problem. The ensemble is composed of k-nearest neighbors, artificial neural networks, and naive Bayes classifiers, and the decisions of these classifiers are combined with weighted majority voting. The empirical study shows that the ensemble configuration using ACOR-optimized weights is capable of resolving conflicts between multiple classifiers and improving classification accuracy.
This paper proposes a heterogeneous ensemble classifier configuration for a multiclass intrusion detection problem. The ensemble is composed of k-nearest neighbors, artificial neural networks, and naive Bayes classifiers. The decisions of these classifiers are combined with weighted majority voting, where optimal weights are generated by ant colony optimization for continuous search spaces. As a comparison basis, we have also implemented the ensemble configuration with the unweighted majority voting or Winner Takes All strategy. To ensure the maximum variety of classifiers, we have implemented three versions of each classification algorithm by varying each classifier's parameters making a total of nine diverse experts for the ensemble. For our empirical study, we used the full NSL-KDD dataset to classify network traffic into one of five different classes. Our results indicate that the ensemble configuration using ACOR-optimized weights is capable of resolving the conflicts between multiple classifiers and improving the overall classification accuracy of the ensemble.

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

4.6
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