**Author details**

Jaydip Sen\* and Sidra Mehtab School of Computing and Analytics, NSHM Knowledge Campus, Kolkata, India

\*Address all correspondence to: jaydip.sen@acm.org

© 2020 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

**173**

*Machine Learning Applications in Misuse and Anomaly Detection*

2005;**24**:295-307. DOI: 10.1016/j.

[8] Cooper GF, Herskovits E. A Bayesian method for the induction of probabilistic networks from data. Machine Learning. 1992;**9**:309-347. DOI:

[9] Verma T, Pearl J. An algorithm for deciding if a set of observed

Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence. Stanford, CA; July 1992. pp. 323-330. DOI: 10.1016/

B978-1-4832-8287-9.50049-9

[10] Pearl J, Wermuth N. When can association graphs admit a causal interpretation? In: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics. Fort Lauderdale, FL; 1993. pp. 141-150. DOI:

10.1007/978-1-4612-2660-4\_21

[11] Schultz MG, Eskin E, Zadok E, Stolfo SJ. Data mining methods for detection of new malicious executables. In: Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (S&P'01). Oakland, CA. Anaheim, CA; 14-16 May 2000. DOI: 10.1109/SECPRI.2001.924286

[12] Ghosh AK, Schwartzbard A, Schatz M. Learning program behavior profiles for intrusion detection. In: Proceedings of the 1st USENIX Workshop on Intrusion Detection and Network Monitoring. Santa Clara, CL;

[13] Gong F. Deciphering Detection Techniques: Part II. Anomaly-Based Intrusion Detection. Santa Clara, CA, USA: White paper, Mcafee Network Security Technologies Group; 2003

[14] Eskin E, Arnold A, Prerau M, Portnoy L, Stolfo S. A geometric framework for unsupervised anomaly detection: Detecting intrusions in

9-12 April 1999. pp. 51-62

independencies has a causal explanation. In: Proceedings of the 8th International

cose.2004.09.008

10.1007/BF00994110

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.92653*

[1] Agrawal R, Imielinski T, Swami A. Mining association rules between sets of items in large databases. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data. Washington, DC: ACM; 1993.

[2] Lee WK, Stolfo SJ, Mok KW. A data mining framework for building intrusion detection models. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. Oakland, CA: IEEE; 14 May 1999. pp. 120-132. DOI:

10.1109/SECPRI.1999.766909

Martin-Vide C. Evolutionary design of intrusion detection programs. International Journal of Network Security. 2007;**4**(3):328-339. DOI: 10.6633/IJNS.200705.4(3).12

[4] Cannady J. Artificial neural networks for misuse detection. In: Proceedings of the National Information Systems Security Conference (NISSC'98). Washington, DC; 6-9 October 1998.

[5] Mukkamala S, Janoski G, Sung AH. Intrusion detection using neural networks and support vector machines. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Neural Networks (IJCNN'02). Honolulu, HI; 12-17 May 2002. pp. 1702-1707. DOI: 10.1109/

[6] Kruegel C, Toth T. Using detection trees to improve signature-based intrusion detection. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection. Pittsburgh, PA; 8-10 September 2003. pp. 173-191. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-45248-5\_10

[7] Chebrolu S, Abraham A, Thomas JP. Feature deduction of intrusion detection

systems. Computers & Security.

[3] Abraham A, Grosan C,

pp. 207-216

**References**

pp. 441-454

IJCNN.2002.1007774

*Machine Learning Applications in Misuse and Anomaly Detection DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.92653*
