pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2602.05817 · v2 · submitted 2026-02-05 · 💻 cs.CR · cs.AI· cs.LG· cs.NI

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Interpreting Manifolds and Graph Neural Embeddings from Internet of Things Traffic Flows

Enrique Feito-Casares , Francisco M. Melgarejo-Meseguer , Elena Casiraghi , Giorgio Valentini , Jos\'e-Luis Rojo-\'Alvarez
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 07:00 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CR cs.AIcs.LGcs.NI
keywords Graph Neural NetworksInternet of ThingsIntrusion DetectionLatent ManifoldFeature AttributionNetwork VisualizationConcept DriftIoT Security
0
0 comments X

The pith

Mapping GNN embeddings onto a latent manifold produces visualizable IoT network states and achieves 0.830 F1 for intrusion detection.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes a pipeline that takes high-dimensional embeddings produced by Graph Neural Networks on IoT traffic data and projects them onto a low-dimensional latent manifold. This step creates directly viewable representations of how network states change over time. Feature attribution is applied to reveal which traffic characteristics define the shape of the manifold. The resulting system reaches an F1-score of 0.830 on intrusion detection tasks and surfaces phenomena such as concept drift. A sympathetic reader would care because the method turns opaque GNN outputs into forms that network operators can inspect and act upon.

Core claim

This work introduces an interpretable pipeline that generates directly visualizable low-dimensional representations by mapping high-dimensional GNN embeddings onto a latent manifold. This projection enables the interpretable monitoring and interoperability of evolving network states, while integrated feature attribution techniques decode the specific characteristics shaping the manifold structure. The framework achieves a classification F1-score of 0.830 for intrusion detection while also highlighting phenomena such as concept drift.

What carries the argument

The projection of high-dimensional GNN embeddings onto a latent manifold together with feature attribution techniques, which together convert relational embeddings into human-readable visualizations of network behavior.

If this is right

  • Network administrators obtain direct visual access to how IoT device relationships evolve.
  • Security analysts can trace intrusion patterns back to specific manifold-shaping characteristics.
  • Concept drift in traffic data becomes observable in the projected space.
  • High-dimensional GNN outputs become usable inputs for human decision-making in security operations.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same manifold-projection step could be applied to other graph-structured domains such as social or sensor networks to gain comparable interpretability.
  • Real-time monitoring pipelines might use detected manifold shifts to trigger automated policy updates.
  • Direct comparison against static aggregation tools would quantify whether the visualized states improve detection of subtle, slow-moving attacks.

Load-bearing premise

The projection onto the latent manifold preserves the key structural dependencies and evolving relationships in the network data, and the feature attribution techniques accurately identify the characteristics shaping the manifold.

What would settle it

A test set in which the low-dimensional manifold visualizations show no separation between normal and malicious flows or in which the attributed features fail to match documented intrusion signatures would falsify the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.05817 by Elena Casiraghi, Enrique Feito-Casares, Francisco M. Melgarejo-Meseguer, Giorgio Valentini, Jos\'e-Luis Rojo-\'Alvarez.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overview of the proposed pipeline for IoT network topology and traffic flow representation. The system [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Schematic of the proposed architecture integrating coupled GIN and P-UMAP for joint device and flow [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Comparison of Ground Truth, Model Predictions, and Misclassification distribution. Top Row (Binary): [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Evolution of latent embeddings across three temporal partitions (Mirai vs Dos) reveals the mechanism of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Multi-level interpretability dashboard of the learned GNN latent space. (Center) UMAP projection delineating [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The rapid expansion of Internet of Things (IoT) ecosystems has led to increasingly complex and heterogeneous network topologies. Traditional network monitoring and visualization tools rely on aggregated metrics or static representations, which fail to capture the evolving relationships and structural dependencies between devices. Although Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) offer a powerful way to learn from relational data, their internal representations often remain opaque and difficult to interpret for security-critical operations. Consequently, this work introduces an interpretable pipeline that generates directly visualizable low-dimensional representations by mapping high-dimensional embeddings onto a latent manifold. This projection enables the interpretable monitoring and interoperability of evolving network states, while integrated feature attribution techniques decode the specific characteristics shaping the manifold structure. The framework achieves a classification F1-score of 0.830 for intrusion detection while also highlighting phenomena such as concept drift. Ultimately, the presented approach bridges the gap between high-dimensional GNN embeddings and human-understandable network behavior, offering new insights for network administrators and security analysts.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper proposes an interpretable pipeline that maps high-dimensional GNN embeddings derived from IoT traffic flows onto a low-dimensional latent manifold. This enables direct visualization of evolving network states, supports intrusion detection with a reported F1-score of 0.830, and uses feature attribution to identify characteristics driving the manifold structure and phenomena such as concept drift.

Significance. If the central projection step can be shown to preserve structural dependencies from the GNN embeddings, the work would offer a useful bridge between opaque relational models and human-interpretable network monitoring in security-critical IoT settings. The combination of manifold visualization with attribution for drift detection is a timely direction, but the absence of any supporting experimental protocol, baselines, or fidelity metrics in the provided description leaves the practical utility and reliability of the 0.830 F1 claim difficult to assess.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The classification F1-score of 0.830 is stated without any accompanying experimental details on datasets, GNN architecture, training/validation splits, baseline comparisons, or error analysis. This omission makes it impossible to determine whether the reported performance supports the pipeline's claims.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract and pipeline description: No quantitative fidelity metric (e.g., trustworthiness, continuity, or Spearman correlation between pairwise distances in the original GNN embedding space and the latent manifold coordinates) is reported. Without such validation, it is unclear whether the visualized manifold and subsequent feature attributions preserve the structural dependencies and evolving relationships required for both the intrusion classification and the concept-drift interpretations.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract would benefit from a concise statement of the specific GNN model and manifold projection technique employed.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below. Where the comments identify gaps in the abstract and validation, we have revised the manuscript to incorporate the necessary details and metrics.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The classification F1-score of 0.830 is stated without any accompanying experimental details on datasets, GNN architecture, training/validation splits, baseline comparisons, or error analysis. This omission makes it impossible to determine whether the reported performance supports the pipeline's claims.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract would benefit from a concise summary of the experimental context to better support the reported F1-score. The full manuscript provides these details: the dataset consists of IoT traffic flows with benign and malicious classes, the GNN uses graph convolutional layers with specific hyperparameters, training employs an 80/20 split with 5-fold cross-validation, baselines include random forest and isolation forest, and error analysis covers confusion matrices and per-class metrics. We have revised the abstract to include a brief overview of the dataset, protocol, and evaluation approach. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and pipeline description: No quantitative fidelity metric (e.g., trustworthiness, continuity, or Spearman correlation between pairwise distances in the original GNN embedding space and the latent manifold coordinates) is reported. Without such validation, it is unclear whether the visualized manifold and subsequent feature attributions preserve the structural dependencies and evolving relationships required for both the intrusion classification and the concept-drift interpretations.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the original manuscript does not report explicit quantitative fidelity metrics for the manifold projection. The current validation relies on qualitative visualizations and the downstream F1-score for intrusion detection. To directly address this concern, the revised version adds trustworthiness and continuity scores along with Spearman correlation between pairwise distances in the GNN embedding space and the latent manifold coordinates. These metrics are now computed and reported in a new subsection, confirming high structural preservation that supports the classification and concept-drift analyses. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; pipeline uses standard GNN-to-manifold projection without self-referential reduction

full rationale

The described framework applies GNNs to IoT traffic graphs, projects embeddings to a low-dimensional manifold, performs classification (F1 0.830), and applies feature attribution. No equations, self-citations, or steps are presented that define a quantity in terms of itself or rename a fitted parameter as a prediction. The manifold projection and downstream tasks are treated as independent operations whose validity rests on empirical performance rather than tautological construction. This is the common honest case of a self-contained empirical pipeline.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Full manuscript text unavailable; abstract alone does not identify any free parameters, axioms, or invented entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5502 in / 1080 out tokens · 27380 ms · 2026-05-16T07:00:00.572750+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    ADTCD: An Adaptive Anomaly Detection Approach Toward Concept Drift in IoT.IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 10(18):15931–15942, September 2023

    Lijuan Xu, Xiao Ding, Haipeng Peng, Dawei Zhao, and Xin Li. ADTCD: An Adaptive Anomaly Detection Approach Toward Concept Drift in IoT.IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 10(18):15931–15942, September 2023. ISSN 2327-4662, 2372-2541. doi:10.1109/JIOT.2023.3265964

    work page doi:10.1109/jiot.2023.3265964 2023

  2. [2]

    HADGA: Hierarchical Attention-Based Dynamic GNN Algorithm for IoT Botnet Detection.IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 12(16):33520–33532, August 2025

    Ning Sun, Lelan Chen, and Guangjie Han. HADGA: Hierarchical Attention-Based Dynamic GNN Algorithm for IoT Botnet Detection.IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 12(16):33520–33532, August 2025. ISSN 2327-4662, 2372-2541. doi:10.1109/JIOT.2025.3576710

    work page doi:10.1109/jiot.2025.3576710 2025

  3. [3]

    Hierarchical Adversarial Attacks Against Graph-Neural-Network-Based IoT Network Intrusion Detection System.IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 9(12):9310–9319, June 2022

    Xiaokang Zhou, Wei Liang, Weimin Li, Ke Yan, Shohei Shimizu, and Kevin I-Kai Wang. Hierarchical Adversarial Attacks Against Graph-Neural-Network-Based IoT Network Intrusion Detection System.IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 9(12):9310–9319, June 2022. ISSN 2327-4662, 2372-2541. doi:10.1109/JIOT.2021.3130434

    work page doi:10.1109/jiot.2021.3130434 2022

  4. [4]

    Testing the manifold hypothesis.Journal of the Amer- ican Mathematical Society, 29(4):983–1049, February 2016

    Charles Fefferman, Sanjoy Mitter, and Hariharan Narayanan. Testing the manifold hypothesis.Journal of the Amer- ican Mathematical Society, 29(4):983–1049, February 2016. ISSN 0894-0347, 1088-6834. doi:10.1090/jams/852. 15 Interpreting Manifolds and Graph Neural Embeddings from Internet of Things Traffic FlowsA PREPRINT

    work page doi:10.1090/jams/852 2016

  5. [5]

    Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2023

    Benyamin Ghojogh, Mark Crowley, Fakhri Karray, and Ali Ghodsi.Elements of Dimensionality Reduction and Manifold Learning. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2023. ISBN 978-3-031-10601-9 978-3-031-10602-6. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-10602-6

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-10602-6 2023

  6. [6]

    L. S. Shapley. 17. A Value for n-Person Games. In Harold William Kuhn and Albert William Tucker, editors, Contributions to the Theory of Games (AM-28), V olume II, pages 307–318. Princeton University Press, December

    work page

  7. [7]

    doi:10.1515/9781400881970-018

    ISBN 978-1-4008-8197-0. doi:10.1515/9781400881970-018

    work page doi:10.1515/9781400881970-018

  8. [8]

    Roth, editor.The Shapley V alue: Essays in Honor of Lloyd S

    Alvin E. Roth, editor.The Shapley V alue: Essays in Honor of Lloyd S. Shapley. Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 1 edition, October 1988. ISBN 978-0-521-36177-4 978-0-521-02133-3 978-0-511-52844-6. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511528446

    work page doi:10.1017/cbo9780511528446 1988

  9. [9]

    Sec2graph: Network Attack Detection Based on Novelty Detection on Graph Structured Data

    Laetitia Leichtnam, Eric Totel, Nicolas Prigent, and Ludovic Mé. Sec2graph: Network Attack Detection Based on Novelty Detection on Graph Structured Data. In Clémentine Maurice, Leyla Bilge, Gianluca Stringhini, and Nuno Neves, editors,Detection of Intrusions and Malware, and Vulnerability Assessment, volume 12223, pages 238–258. Springer International Pub...

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-52683-2_12 2020

  10. [10]

    GRANEF: Utilization of a Graph Database for Network Forensics:

    Milan Cermak and Denisa Sramkova. GRANEF: Utilization of a Graph Database for Network Forensics:. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Security and Cryptography, pages 785–790, Online Streaming, — Select a Country —, 2021. SCITEPRESS - Science and Technology Publications. ISBN 978-989-758-524-1. doi:10.5220/0010581807850790

    work page doi:10.5220/0010581807850790 2021

  11. [11]

    Detection and Threat Prioritization of Pivoting Attacks in Large Networks.IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing, 8(2):404–415, April 2020

    Giovanni Apruzzese, Fabio Pierazzi, Michele Colajanni, and Mirco Marchetti. Detection and Threat Prioritization of Pivoting Attacks in Large Networks.IEEE Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computing, 8(2):404–415, April 2020. ISSN 2168-6750, 2376-4562. doi:10.1109/TETC.2017.2764885

    work page doi:10.1109/tetc.2017.2764885 2020

  12. [12]

    A review on graph-based approaches for network security monitoring and botnet detection.International Journal of Information Security, 23(1):119–140, February 2024

    Sofiane Lagraa, Martin Husák, Hamida Seba, Satyanarayana Vuppala, Radu State, and Moussa Ouedraogo. A review on graph-based approaches for network security monitoring and botnet detection.International Journal of Information Security, 23(1):119–140, February 2024. ISSN 1615-5262, 1615-5270. doi:10.1007/s10207-023- 00742-7

    work page doi:10.1007/s10207-023- 2024

  13. [13]

    Graph Neural Networks for Intrusion De- tection: A Survey.IEEE Access, 11:49114–49139, 2023

    Tristan Bilot, Nour El Madhoun, Khaldoun Al Agha, and Anis Zouaoui. Graph Neural Networks for Intrusion De- tection: A Survey.IEEE Access, 11:49114–49139, 2023. ISSN 2169-3536. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3275789

    work page doi:10.1109/access.2023.3275789 2023

  14. [14]

    Barnes, and Mehdi Boukhechba

    Guimin Dong, Mingyue Tang, Zhiyuan Wang, Jiechao Gao, Sikun Guo, Lihua Cai, Robert Gutierrez, Bradford Campbel, Laura E. Barnes, and Mehdi Boukhechba. Graph Neural Networks in IoT: A Survey.ACM Transactions on Sensor Networks, 19(2):1–50, May 2023. ISSN 1550-4859, 1550-4867. doi:10.1145/3565973

    work page doi:10.1145/3565973 2023

  15. [15]

    Graph Neural Networks for Next-Generation-IoT: Recent Advances and Open Chal- lenges.IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, pages 1–38, 2025

    Nguyen Xuan Tung, Le Tung Giang, Bui Duc Son, Seon Geun-Jeong, Trinh Van Chien, Lajos Hanzo, and Won Joo Hwang. Graph Neural Networks for Next-Generation-IoT: Recent Advances and Open Chal- lenges.IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, pages 1–38, 2025. ISSN 1553-877X, 2373-745X. doi:10.1109/COMST.2025.3613845

    work page doi:10.1109/comst.2025.3613845 2025

  16. [16]

    Exploring Temporal GNN Embeddings for Darknet Traffic Analysis

    Luca Gioacchini, Andrea Cavallo, Marco Mellia, and Luca Vassio. Exploring Temporal GNN Embeddings for Darknet Traffic Analysis. InProceedings of the 2nd on Graph Neural Networking Workshop 2023, pages 31–36, Paris France, December 2023. ACM. ISBN 979-8-4007-0448-2. doi:10.1145/3630049.3630175

    work page doi:10.1145/3630049.3630175 2023

  17. [17]

    Evaluation of Anomaly Detection for Cybersecurity Using Inductive Node Embedding with Convolutional Graph Neural Networks

    Amani Abou Rida, Rabih Amhaz, and Pierre Parrend. Evaluation of Anomaly Detection for Cybersecurity Using Inductive Node Embedding with Convolutional Graph Neural Networks. In Rosa Maria Benito, Chantal Cherifi, Hocine Cherifi, Esteban Moro, Luis M. Rocha, and Marta Sales-Pardo, editors,Complex Networks & Their Applications X, volume 1073, pages 563–574. ...

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-93413-2_47 2022

  18. [18]

    Anomaly traffic detection in IoT security using graph neu- ral networks.Journal of Information Security and Applications, 76:103532, August 2023

    Mengnan Gao, Lifa Wu, Qi Li, and Wei Chen. Anomaly traffic detection in IoT security using graph neu- ral networks.Journal of Information Security and Applications, 76:103532, August 2023. ISSN 22142126. doi:10.1016/j.jisa.2023.103532

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jisa.2023.103532 2023

  19. [19]

    GNN-Based Network Traffic Analysis for the Detection of Sequential Attacks in IoT.Electronics, 13(12):2274, June 2024

    Tanzeela Altaf, Xu Wang, Wei Ni, Guangsheng Yu, Ren Ping Liu, and Robin Braun. GNN-Based Network Traffic Analysis for the Detection of Sequential Attacks in IoT.Electronics, 13(12):2274, June 2024. ISSN 2079-9292. doi:10.3390/electronics13122274

    work page doi:10.3390/electronics13122274 2024

  20. [20]

    Powerful graph neural network for node classification of the IoT network.Internet of Things, 28:101410, December 2024

    Mohammad Abrar Shakil Sejan, Md Habibur Rahman, Md Abdul Aziz, Rana Tabassum, Jung-In Baik, and Hyoung-Kyu Song. Powerful graph neural network for node classification of the IoT network.Internet of Things, 28:101410, December 2024. ISSN 25426605. doi:10.1016/j.iot.2024.101410

    work page doi:10.1016/j.iot.2024.101410 2024

  21. [21]

    Traffic prediction for diverse edge IoT data using graph network.Journal of Cloud Computing, 13(1):84, April 2024

    Tao Shen, Lu Zhang, Renkang Geng, Shuai Li, and Bin Sun. Traffic prediction for diverse edge IoT data using graph network.Journal of Cloud Computing, 13(1):84, April 2024. ISSN 2192-113X. doi:10.1186/s13677-023- 00543-2. 16 Interpreting Manifolds and Graph Neural Embeddings from Internet of Things Traffic FlowsA PREPRINT

    work page doi:10.1186/s13677-023- 2024

  22. [22]

    F. Zola, L. Segurola-Gil, J.L. Bruse, M. Galar, and R. Orduna-Urrutia. Network traffic analysis through node be- haviour classification: A graph-based approach with temporal dissection and data-level preprocessing.Computers & Security, 115:102632, April 2022. ISSN 01674048. doi:10.1016/j.cose.2022.102632

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cose.2022.102632 2022

  23. [23]

    Detecting malicious IoT network communication through Graph Neural Networks in real-world conditions.Pattern Recognition Letters, 189:92–98, March 2025

    Vincenzo Carletti, Pasquale Foggia, Francesco Rosa, and Mario Vento. Detecting malicious IoT network communication through Graph Neural Networks in real-world conditions.Pattern Recognition Letters, 189:92–98, March 2025. ISSN 01678655. doi:10.1016/j.patrec.2025.01.010

    work page doi:10.1016/j.patrec.2025.01.010 2025

  24. [24]

    Strong supermartingales and limits of nonnegative martingales

    Luca Gioacchini, Welton Santos, Barbara Lopes, Idilio Drago, Marco Mellia, Jussara M. Almeida, and Mar- cos André Gonçalves. Explainable Stacking Models based on Complementary Traffic Embeddings. In2024 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy Workshops (EuroS&PW), pages 261–272, Vienna, Austria, July 2024. IEEE. ISBN 979-8-3503-6729-4. doi:10....

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1109/eurospw61312.2024.00035 2024

  25. [25]

    Cross- Network Embeddings Transfer for Traffic Analysis.IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, 21 (3):2686–2699, June 2024

    Luca Gioacchini, Marco Mellia, Luca Vassio, Idilio Drago, Giulia Milan, Zied Ben Houidi, and Dario Rossi. Cross- Network Embeddings Transfer for Traffic Analysis.IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, 21 (3):2686–2699, June 2024. ISSN 1932-4537, 2373-7379. doi:10.1109/TNSM.2023.3329442

    work page doi:10.1109/tnsm.2023.3329442 2024

  26. [26]

    Generic Multi-modal Represen- tation Learning for Network Traffic Analysis, 2024

    Luca Gioacchini, Idilio Drago, Marco Mellia, Zied Ben Houidi, and Dario Rossi. Generic Multi-modal Represen- tation Learning for Network Traffic Analysis, 2024

    work page 2024

  27. [27]

    Hamilton.Graph Representation Learning

    William L. Hamilton.Graph Representation Learning. Synthesis Lectures on Artificial Intelligence and Ma- chine Learning. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2020. ISBN 978-3-031-00460-5 978-3-031-01588-5. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-01588-5

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-01588-5 2020

  28. [28]

    How powerful are graph neural networks? In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2019

    Keyulu Xu, Weihua Hu, Jure Leskovec, and Stefanie Jegelka. How powerful are graph neural networks? In International Conference on Learning Representations, 2019

    work page 2019

  29. [29]

    UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection for Dimension Reduction, 2018

    Leland McInnes, John Healy, and James Melville. UMAP: Uniform Manifold Approximation and Projection for Dimension Reduction, 2018

    work page 2018

  30. [30]

    Parametric UMAP embeddings for representation and semi-supervised learning, 2020

    Tim Sainburg, Leland McInnes, and Timothy Q Gentner. Parametric UMAP embeddings for representation and semi-supervised learning, 2020

    work page 2020

  31. [31]

    Ghorbani

    Euclides Carlos Pinto Neto, Sajjad Dadkhah, Raphael Ferreira, Alireza Zohourian, Rongxing Lu, and Ali A. Ghorbani. CICIoT2023: A Real-Time Dataset and Benchmark for Large-Scale Attacks in IoT Environment. Sensors, 23(13):5941, June 2023. ISSN 1424-8220. doi:10.3390/s23135941

    work page doi:10.3390/s23135941 2023

  32. [32]

    ISBN 978-1-6654-2812-5

    Tal Ridnik, Emanuel Ben-Baruch, Nadav Zamir, Asaf Noy, Itamar Friedman, Matan Protter, and Lihi Zelnik- Manor. Asymmetric Loss For Multi-Label Classification. In2021 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pages 82–91, Montreal, QC, Canada, October 2021. IEEE. ISBN 978-1-6654-2812-5. doi:10.1109/ICCV48922.2021.00015

    work page doi:10.1109/iccv48922.2021.00015 2021

  33. [33]

    Explaining prediction models and individual predictions with feature contributions.Knowledge and Information Systems, 41(3):647–665, December 2014

    Erik Štrumbelj and Igor Kononenko. Explaining prediction models and individual predictions with feature contributions.Knowledge and Information Systems, 41(3):647–665, December 2014. ISSN 0219-1377, 0219-

    work page 2014

  34. [34]

    doi:10.1007/s10115-013-0679-x. 17

    work page doi:10.1007/s10115-013-0679-x