SemiScope: Disentangling Classifier Tuning and Joint Optimization in Semi-Supervised Security Classification
Mirrored from arXiv — Machine Learning for archival readability. Support the source by reading on the original site.
Computer Science > Machine Learning
Title:SemiScope: Disentangling Classifier Tuning and Joint Optimization in Semi-Supervised Security Classification
Abstract:Background. Labeled data for security classification is scarce. Semi-supervised learning (SSL) propagates labels from a small labeled pool to larger unlabeled pools. Yet security applications often use SSL as a black box: default parameters, a fixed classifier, and no handling of pseudo-label-induced class imbalance. Aims. Recent work reports sizeable gains from optimizing SSL pipelines via joint search, AutoML, or per-component tuning. These gains are hard to attribute: they may reflect useful SSL-classifier interactions, or mostly from simply tuning the downstream classifier. We disentangle these effects for binary tabular security data with classical SSL and tree-based classifiers. Method. We build SemiScope as an analysis instrument, not a deployment recommendation. It uses Bayesian Optimization to jointly tune SSL settings, confidence filtering, oversampling, and the classifier. The key control, Tuned-Clf, fixes SSL to defaults but gets the same 100-trial classifier budget and validation-set threshold tuning as SemiScope. At 10% labels, we compare them with paired TOST using a +/-1.0 g-measure smallest effect of interest. Results. SemiScope beats every default SSL baseline on all five datasets, improving over the strongest by 0.7-12.7 points. Under the equal-budget control, Tuned-Clf is statistically equivalent to the full pipeline on 4 of 5 datasets; Phishing is inconclusive. Classifier HPO alone recovers a median 86% of SemiScope's gain over Default Self-Training (ST) + Random Forest (RF). Conclusions. The reusable contribution is the decomposition protocol. A simpler recipe suffices: use Self-Training, tune the classifier with Bayesian Optimization, and tune the decision threshold on validation data. It reaches within 1 g-measure of Supervised RF at 20-30% labels on four datasets and 40% on Drebin, at the same or lower label rate than Default ST + RF on every dataset.
| Subjects: | Machine Learning (cs.LG) |
| Cite as: | arXiv:2607.00113 [cs.LG] |
| (or arXiv:2607.00113v1 [cs.LG] for this version) | |
| https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2607.00113
arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
|
Access Paper:
- View PDF
- HTML (experimental)
- TeX Source
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
More from arXiv — Machine Learning
-
Representation as a Bottleneck for Mechanistic Interpretability: The Manifestation Unit Protocol
Jul 2
-
SNAP-FM: Sparse Nonlinear Accelerated Projection for Physics-Constrained Generative Modeling
Jul 2
-
A Filtered Mixture-of-Generators for Fully Synthetic Survival Training
Jul 2
-
EVOTS: Evolutionary Transformer Search for Time Series Forecasting
Jul 2
Discussion (0)
Sign in to join the discussion. Free account, 30 seconds — email code or GitHub.
Sign in →No comments yet. Sign in and be the first to say something.