| Literature DB >> 35214308 |
Gaoyuan Liu1, Huiqi Zhao1, Fang Fan1,2, Gang Liu1, Qiang Xu2, Shah Nazir3.
Abstract
Aiming at the intrusion detection problem of the wireless sensor network (WSN), considering the combined characteristics of the wireless sensor network, we consider setting up a corresponding intrusion detection system on the edge side through edge computing. An intrusion detection system (IDS), as a proactive network security protection technology, provides an effective defense system for the WSN. In this paper, we propose a WSN intelligent intrusion detection model, through the introduction of the k-Nearest Neighbor algorithm (kNN) in machine learning and the introduction of the arithmetic optimization algorithm (AOA) in evolutionary calculation, to form an edge intelligence framework that specifically performs the intrusion detection when the WSN encounters a DoS attack. In order to enhance the accuracy of the model, we use a parallel strategy to enhance the communication between the populations and use the Lévy flight strategy to adjust the optimization. The proposed PL-AOA algorithm performs well in the benchmark function test and effectively guarantees the improvement of the kNN classifier. We use Matlab2018b to conduct simulation experiments based on the WSN-DS data set and our model achieves 99% ACC, with a nearly 10% improvement compared with the original kNN when performing DoS intrusion detection. The experimental results show that the proposed intrusion detection model has good effects and practical application significance.Entities:
Keywords: intrusion; wireless sensor networks
Year: 2022 PMID: 35214308 PMCID: PMC8963005 DOI: 10.3390/s22041407
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1The PL-AOA algorithm flow.
Figure 2PL-AOA combined with kNN.
Figure 3The model WSN intrusion detection system.
The 12 benchmark functions.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 30 |
| 0 |
|
| 30 |
| 0 |
|
| 30 |
| 0 |
|
| 30 |
| 0 |
|
| 30 |
| 0 |
|
| 30 |
| 0 |
|
| 30 |
| 0 |
|
| 2 |
| 0 |
|
| 2 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
|
|
|
| 4 |
|
|
|
| 4 |
|
|
Figure 4The convergence curves of test function.
Comparison results of PL-AOA, AOA, SCA, and MVO on 12 benchmark functions.
| Function | Algorithm | Best Value | AVG | STD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| PL-AOA |
|
|
|
| AOA |
|
|
| |
| SCA |
|
|
| |
| MVO |
|
|
| |
|
| PL-AOA |
|
|
|
| AOA |
|
|
| |
| SCA |
|
|
| |
| MVO |
|
|
| |
|
| PL-AOA |
|
|
|
| AOA |
|
|
| |
| SCA |
|
|
| |
| MVO |
|
|
| |
|
| PL-AOA |
|
|
|
| AOA |
|
|
| |
| SCA |
|
|
| |
| MVO |
|
|
| |
|
| PL-AOA |
|
|
|
| AOA |
|
|
| |
| SCA |
|
|
| |
| MVO |
|
|
| |
|
| PL-AOA |
|
|
|
| AOA |
|
|
| |
| SCA |
|
|
| |
| MVO |
|
|
| |
|
| PL-AOA |
|
|
|
| AOA |
|
|
| |
| SCA |
|
|
| |
| MVO |
|
|
| |
|
| PL-AOA |
|
|
|
| AOA |
|
|
| |
| SCA |
|
|
| |
| MVO |
|
|
| |
|
| PL-AOA |
|
|
|
| AOA |
|
|
| |
| SCA |
|
|
| |
| MVO |
|
|
| |
|
| PL-AOA |
|
|
|
| AOA |
|
|
| |
| SCA |
|
|
| |
| MVO |
|
|
| |
|
| PL-AOA |
|
|
|
| AOA |
|
|
| |
| SCA |
|
|
| |
| MVO |
|
|
| |
|
| PL-AOA |
|
|
|
| AOA |
|
|
| |
| SCA |
|
|
| |
| MVO |
|
|
| |
| Compared with the four algorithms | Algorithm | Win | Win | Win |
| PL-AOA | 9 | 9 | 8 | |
| AOA | 0 | 0 | 1 | |
| SCA | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
| MVO | 1 | 1 | 1 |
The data of WSN-DS.
| Data Set | The Type of Data | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Normal | Blackhole | Grayhole | Flooding | Scheduling Attacks | |
| Number | 340,066 | 10,049 | 14,596 | 3312 | 6638 |
Classification effects of the four models.
| Model | ACC (%) | DR (%) | FPR (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 0.91162 | 0.95291 | 0.51429 |
|
| 0.92893 | 0.94226 | 0.035714 |
|
| 0.97727 | 0.97861 | 0.045455 |
|
| 0.99721 | 0.99171 | 0.068966 |
Figure 5, , , and confusion matrix.
Figure 6The false positive rate comparison for , , , and .
Figure 7The AOC curves for , , , and .