Table 7 Comparative outcomes of the SAMFL-SCDCOA model with existing approaches under the UNSW-NB15 dataset.
Method | \(Acc{u}_{y}\) | \(Pre{c}_{n}\) | \(Rec{a}_{l}\) | \({F}_{score}\) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
KNN algorithm | 92.79 | 94.92 | 83.07 | 88.72 |
MLP model | 92.39 | 91.89 | 87.08 | 85.10 |
CNN classifier | 94.23 | 92.35 | 85.13 | 85.15 |
SVM model | 92.77 | 86.14 | 80.92 | 86.43 |
LSTM method | 95.73 | 85.38 | 84.65 | 88.24 |
DE-VIT model | 97.48 | 88.56 | 81.79 | 86.40 |
DBN algorithm | 92.44 | 88.45 | 80.56 | 89.61 |
HMO-EVO | 92.46 | 91.95 | 87.14 | 85.16 |
MBiLSTM-GRU | 94.31 | 92.41 | 85.19 | 85.20 |
MRS-PFIDS | 92.84 | 86.19 | 80.99 | 86.49 |
SAMFL-SCDCOA | 99.04 | 95.13 | 89.77 | 91.69 |