Table 13 Comparison analysis of UNSW-NB15 dataset
SI. No. | Authors | Data balancing | Dimension reduction | Algorithm | Selected reature | Binary Acc(%) | Multilabel Acc(%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | [25] | SMOTE | – | ELM | – | 98.43 | – |
2 | [26] | – | XGB | DT, ANN | 19 | 90.85 (DT) | 77.51 (ANN) |
3 | [29] | – | MQTT+TCP | RF | – | 98.67 | 97.37 |
4 | [44] | – | WFEU | FFDNN | 22 | 87.10 | 77.16 |
5 | [38] | – | – | DNN | – | 91.50 | – |
6 | [37] | – | – | ANN | – | – | 97.89 |
7 | [39] | STL | – | LSTM+CNN | – | – | – |
8 | [22] | SGM | – | CNN | – | – | 96.54 |
9 | [45] | – | – | CNN-WDLSTM | – | 97.17 | 98.43 |
10 | Our Proposal | RO | SFE-PCA | RF | 10 | 99.59 | 99.95 |
11 | Our Proposal | RO | SFE-PCA | ET | 10 | 99.59 | 99.95 |