Compares explainable AI models for intrusion detection in transportation systems, indicating significant improvements in accuracy and interpretability.
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) and smart mobility/logistics ecosystems rely on heterogeneous, safety-critical networks that span information technology and operational technology domains across connected vehicles, mobility infrastructure, and supply-chain systems, making intrusion detection essential. However, many AI-driven IDS benchmarks overfit specific datasets and offer limited interpretability for operational use. This study reproduces the AI-driven IDS workflow of Al-Doori and Alheeti Al-Doori et al. (2025) and adapts it toward transportation cybersecurity by emphasizing reproducible preprocessing, tuned models, imbalance handling, and explainability. The pipeline is evaluated on KDD Cup’99 (10%) and CIC-IDS2017 using one-hot encoding and z-score normalization, comparing CatBoost, LightGBM, XGBoost, and TabNet against a compact DNN with Optuna tuning and class-imbalance mitigation (class weights; SMOTE for analysis). CatBoost achieves 99.9% accuracy with macro-F1 ≈0.94 on KDD’99 and ∼0.99 accuracy with macro-F1 ≈0.92 on CIC-IDS2017, where rare attacks remain the main source of errors. SHAP explanations confirm that traffic volume, connection-rate, and flow-timing features drive predictions, supporting interpretable triage for ITS operators. Code, splits, and hyperparameters are released for reproducibility.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jahiduzzaman et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: