↓ Skip to main content

Simulations in Cyber-Security: A Review of Cognitive Modeling of Network Attackers, Defenders, and Users

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Readers on

mendeley
151 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Simulations in Cyber-Security: A Review of Cognitive Modeling of Network Attackers, Defenders, and Users
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00691
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vladislav D. Veksler, Norbou Buchler, Blaine E. Hoffman, Daniel N. Cassenti, Char Sample, Shridat Sugrim

Abstract

Computational models of cognitive processes may be employed in cyber-security tools, experiments, and simulations to address human agency and effective decision-making in keeping computational networks secure. Cognitive modeling can addresses multi-disciplinary cyber-security challenges requiring cross-cutting approaches over the human and computational sciences such as the following: (a) adversarial reasoning and behavioral game theory to predict attacker subjective utilities and decision likelihood distributions, (b) human factors of cyber tools to address human system integration challenges, estimation of defender cognitive states, and opportunities for automation, (c) dynamic simulations involving attacker, defender, and user models to enhance studies of cyber epidemiology and cyber hygiene, and (d) training effectiveness research and training scenarios to address human cyber-security performance, maturation of cyber-security skill sets, and effective decision-making. Models may be initially constructed at the group-level based on mean tendencies of each subject's subgroup, based on known statistics such as specific skill proficiencies, demographic characteristics, and cultural factors. For more precise and accurate predictions, cognitive models may be fine-tuned to each individual attacker, defender, or user profile, and updated over time (based on recorded behavior) via techniques such as model tracing and dynamic parameter fitting.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 151 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 151 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 13%
Researcher 14 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 7%
Student > Bachelor 9 6%
Other 19 13%
Unknown 55 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 51 34%
Engineering 10 7%
Business, Management and Accounting 6 4%
Psychology 5 3%
Decision Sciences 3 2%
Other 14 9%
Unknown 62 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 27 July 2018.
All research outputs
#15,266,606
of 26,741,403 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#13,636
of 35,592 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#171,718
of 345,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#362
of 659 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,741,403 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 35,592 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 345,345 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 659 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.