Model of Improved a Kernel Fast Learning Network Based on Intrusion Detection System

  • Mohammed Hasan AliEmail author
  • Mohamed Fadli Zolkipli
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 866)


The detection of network attacks on computer systems remains an attractive but challenging research scope. As network attackers keep changing their methods of attack execution to evade the deployed intrusion-detection systems (IDS), machine learning (ML) algorithms have been introduced to boost the performance of the IDS. The incorporation of a single parallel hidden layer feed-forward neural network to the Fast Learning Network (FLN) architecture gave rise to the improved Extreme Learning Machine (ELM). The input weights and hidden layer biases are randomly generated. In this paper, the particle swan optimization algorithm (PSO) was used to obtain an optimal set of initial parameters for Reduce Kernel FLN (RK-FLN), thus, creating an optimal RKFLN classifier named PSO-RKELM. The derived model was rigorously compared to four models, including basic ELM, basic FLN, Reduce Kernel ELM (RK-ELM), and RK-FLN. The approach was tested on the KDD Cup99 intrusion detection dataset and the results proved the proposed PSO-RKFLN as an accurate, reliable, and effective classification algorithm.


Fast learning network Kernel extreme learning machine KDD Cup99 Particle swarm optimization algorithm Intrusion detection system 


  1. 1.
    Buczak, A., Guven, E.: A survey of data mining and machine learning methods for cyber security intrusion detection. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials, vol. PP, no. 99, p. 1, 2015Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Patel, A., Taghavi, M., Bakhtiyari, K., Celestino Jr J.: An intrusion detection and prevention system in cloud computing: a systematic review. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 36(1), 25–41 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Liao, H.-J., Lin, C.-H.R., Lin, Y.-C.: Intrusion detection system: a comprehensive review. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 36(1), 16–24 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Liao, H.J., Richard Lin, C.H., Lin, Y.C., Tung, K.Y.: Intrusion detection system: a comprehensive review. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 36(1), 16–24 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tsai, C., Hsu, Y., Lin, C., Lin, W.: Expert systems with applications intrusion detection by machine learning: a review. Expert Syst. Appl. 36(10), 11994–12000 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fossaceca, J.M., Mazzuchi, T.A., Sarkani, S.: MARK-ELM: Application of a novel multiple kernel learning framework for improving the robustness of network intrusion detection. Expert Syst. Appl. 42(8), 4062–4080 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mishra, P., Pilli, E.S., Varadharajan, V., Tupakula, U.: Intrusion detection techniques in cloud environment: a survey. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 77, pp. 18–47, October 2016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jaiganesh, V., Sumathi, P.: Kernelized extreme learning machine with levenberg-marquardt learning approach towards intrusion detection. Int. J. Comput. Appl. 54(14), 38–44 (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Udaya Sampath, X.W., Perera Miriya Thanthrige, K., Samarabandu, J.: Machine learning techniques for intrusion detection. IEEE Can. Conf. Electr. Comput. Eng. 1–10 (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aslahi-Shahri, B.M., et al.: A hybrid method consisting of GA and SVM for intrusion detection system. Neural Comput. Appl. 27(6), 1669–1676 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Atefi, K., Yahya, S., Dak, A.Y., Atefi, A.: A Hybrid Intrusion detection system based on differen machine learning algorithms. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference Computing Informatics, no. 22, pp. 312–320 (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ding, S., Xu, X., Nie, R.: Extreme learning machine and its applications. Neural Comput. Appl. 25(3–4), 549–556 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Singh, R., Kumar, H., Singla, R.K.: An intrusion detection system using network traffic profiling and online sequential extreme learning machine. Expert Syst. Appl. 42(22), 8609–8624 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ali, M.H., Zolkipli, M.F., Mohammed, M.A., Jaber, M.M.: Enhance of extreme learning machine-genetic algorithm hybrid based on intrusion detection system. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 12(16), 4180–4185 (2017)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lu, H., Du, B., Liu, J., Xia, H., Yeap, W.K.: A kernel extreme learning machine algorithm based on improved particle swam optimization. Memetic Comput. 9(2), 121–128 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Huang, G.-B., Zhou, H., Ding, X., Zhang, R.: Extreme learning machine for regression and multiclass classification. IEEE Trans. Syst. man, Cybern. Part B, Cybern. 42, (2), 513–529 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pal, M., Maxwell, A.E., Warner, T.A.: Kernel-based extreme learning machine for remote-sensing image classification. Remote Sens. Lett. 4(9), 853–862 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liu, B., Tang, L., Wang, J., Li, A., Hao, Y.: 2-D defect profile reconstruction from ultrasonic guided wave signals based on QGA-kernelized ELM. Neurocomputing 128, 217–223 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Deng, W.Y., Zheng, Q.H., Wang, Z.M.: Cross-person activity recognition using reduced kernel extreme learning machine. Neural Netw. 53, 1–7 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chen, H.L., Wang, G., Ma, C., Cai, Z.N., Bin Liu, W., Wang, S. J.: An efficient hybrid kernel extreme learning machine approach for early diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease. Neurocomputing 184, 131–144 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chen, C., Li, W., Su, H., Liu, K.: Spectral-spatial classification of hyperspectral image based on kernel extreme learning machine. Remote Sens. 6(6), 5795–5814 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fu, H., Vong, C.-M., Wong, P.-K., Yang, Z.: Fast detection of impact location using kernel extreme learning machine. Neural Comput. Appl. 1–10 (2014)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Li, L., Wang, C., Li, W., Chen, J.: Hyperspectral image classification by AdaBoost weighted composite kernel extreme learning machines. Neurocomputing 275, 1725–1733 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wang, Y., Wang, A.N., Ai, Q., Sun, H.J.: An adaptive kernel-based weighted extreme learning machine approach for effective detection of Parkinson’s disease. Biomed. Signal Process. Control 38, 400–410 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wang, M., et al.: Toward an optimal kernel extreme learning machine using a chaotic moth-flame optimization strategy with applications in medical diagnoses. Neurocomputing 267, 69–84 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Li, X., Niu, P., Li, G.: An adaptive extreme learning machine for modeling NOx emission of a 300 MW circulating fluidized bed boiler (2017)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Li, G., Niu, P.: Combustion optimization of a coal-fired boiler with double linear fast learning network (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Abadeh, M.S., Mohamadi, H., Habibi, J.: Design and analysis of genetic fuzzy systems for intrusion detection in computer networks. Expert Syst. Appl. 38(6), 7067–7075 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chen, T., Zhang, X., Jin, S., Kim, O.: Efficient classification using parallel and scalable compressed model and its application on intrusion detection. Expert Syst. Appl. 41(13), 5972–5983 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bolón-Canedo, V., Sánchez-Maroño, N., Alonso-Betanzos, A.: Feature selection and classification in multiple class datasets: an application to KDD Cup 99 dataset. Expert Syst. Appl. 38(5), 5947–5957 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mitchell, R., Chen, I.-R.: A survey of intrusion detection techniques. Comput. Secur. 12(4), 405–418 (2014)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tavallaee, M., Bagheri, E., Lu, W., Ghorbani, A.A.: A detailed analysis of the KDD CUP 99 data set. In: IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence for Security and Defense Applications CISDA 2009 (June 2009)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Engen, V., Vincent, J., Phalp, K.: Exploring discrepancies in findings obtained with the KDD Cup’99 data set. Intell. Data Anal. 15(2), 251–276 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hu, W., Gao, J., Wang, Y., Wu, O., Maybank, S.: Online adaboost-based parameterized methods for dynamic distributed network intrusion detection. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 44(1), 66–82 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Weller-Fahy, D.J.: Network intrusion dataset assessment, p. 114 (2013)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Chou, T.-S., Fan, J., Fan, S., Makki, K.: Ensemble of machine learning algorithms for intrusion detection. In: 2009 IEEE International Conference System Man and Cybernetics, pp. 3976–3980 (2009)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Li, G., Niu, P., Duan, X., Zhang, X.: Fast learning network: a novel artificial neural network with a fast learning speed. Neural Comput. Appl. 24(7–8), 1683–1695 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Guang-Bin, H., Qin-Yu, Z., Chee-Kheong, S.: Extreme learning machine: a new learning scheme of feedforward neural networks. In: Neural Networks, 2004. Proceedings. 2004 IEEE International Joint Conference, vol. 2, pp. 985–990. August 2004Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Smola, A.J., Schölkopf, B.: Learning with Kernels. February 2002Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Flynn, H., Cameron, S.: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Recognition Systems CORES 2013, vol. 226 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Trelea, I.C.: The particle swarm optimization algorithm: Convergence analysis and parameter selection. Inf. Process. Lett. 85(6), 317–325 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    J. Blondin, “Particle swarm optimization: A tutorial,” … Site Http//Cs. Armstrong. Edu/Saad/Csci8100/Pso Tutor. …, pp. 1–5, 2009Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Sengupta, A., Bhadauria, S., Mohanty, S.P.: TL-HLS: Methodology for Low Cost Hardware Trojan Security Aware Scheduling with Optimal Loop Unrolling Factor during High Level Synthesis. IEEE Trans. Comput. Des. Integr. Circuits Syst. 36(4), 660–673 (2017)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Mishra, V.K., Sengupta, A.: Swarm-inspired exploration of architecture and unrolling factors for nested-loop-based application in architectural synthesis. Electron. Lett. 51(2), 157–159 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Sengupta, A., Bhadauria, S.: User power-delay budget driven PSO based design space exploration of optimal k-cycle transient fault secured datapath during high level synthesis. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium Quality Electronic Design ISQED, vol. 2015, no. 6, pp. 289–292 (2015)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Mishra, V.K., Sengupta, A.: MO-PSE: Adaptive multi-objective particle swarm optimization based design space exploration in architectural synthesis for application specific processor design. Adv. Eng. Softw. 67, 111–124 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Shi, Y., Eberhart, R.: A modified particle swarm optimizer. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation, IEEE World Congress on Computational Intelligence (Cat. No.98TH8360), pp. 69–73 (1998)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Computer Systems and Software EngineeringUniversity Malaysia PahangGambangMalaysia

Personalised recommendations