ArticlePloS one2025
Reliable evaluation for the AI-enabled intrusion detection system from data perspective.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As the primary link in cybersecurity, the intrusion detection system (IDS) is of indispensable importance. Many studies have proposed sophisticated artificial intelligence (AI) models to detect intrusion behavior from a large amount of data, yet they have ignored the fact that poor data quality has a direct impact on the performance of IDS. The poor data quality is mainly attributed to the interference and damage, such as data tampering, poisoning, and corruption, which leads to decision-making deviations, triggering a serious trust crisis of model application. This paper proposes a multi-indicator comprehensive evaluation method (MICEM) to ensure the reliability of AI decision-making from data perspective. First, several evaluation indicators are established to analyze the potential risks that intrusion detection data may face from the different dimensions, and specific quantitative methods are provided. Second, a comprehensive evaluation is conducted based on the results of each indicator to determine the quality of the intrusion detection data as a whole, thus guaranteeing the usability and reliability of AI-enabled IDS. Finally, the effectiveness and practicality of the proposed MICEM are fully verified by evaluating the benchmark-CICIDS2017 dataset and the real intrusion detection dataset.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.