An AI-Driven LSTM–Fuzzy Framework for Adaptive DDoS Detection in Cyber–Physical Systems (CPSs)
Source abstract
Abstract
Cyber–Physical Systems (CPSs) are increasingly vulnerable to Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) attacks, which can disrupt critical operations and compromise system safety. Although deep learning (DL) techniques are widely adopted for cyberattack detection, conventional DL-based classifiers often struggle to handle the uncertainty and ambiguity inherent in network traffic data. To address this limitation, this paper proposes an AI-driven hybrid framework, termed LSTM–Fuzzy–CPS, for adaptive DDoS detection in CPS environments. Unlike prior LSTM–Fuzzy approaches that are primarily restricted to SDN settings, the proposed framework is adapted for CPS environments and introduces continuous risk scoring, reduced false positives for safety-critical operation, and proportional mitigation mechanisms. The framework consists of a detection module and a conceptual mitigation module. The detection module, named LSTM–Fuzzy–Detector, integrates an LSTM network with a Mamdani-type fuzzy inference system that maps LSTM outputs into a continuous risk score using triangular membership functions (Low, Medium, High) and centroid defuzzification. The mitigation module is designed as a rule-based conceptual framework that translates risk levels into adaptive response actions; however, its experimental implementation is left for future work. The proposed detector is evaluated on the CICIoT2023 dataset and achieves an accuracy of 99.83% with a false-positive rate of 0.12%, demonstrating strong robustness against complex and evolving attack patterns. These results indicate that the proposed framework provides an effective, interpretable, and scalable solution for intelligent threat detection in CPS environments.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Network Security and Intrusion Detection · Smart Grid Security and Resilience · Software-Defined Networks and 5G
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Computer Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, İstanbul Topkapı University, Istanbul 34310, Turkey
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. Cyber-physical systems security—A survey10.1109/JIOT.2017.2703172 ↗
2. Security modelling for cyber-physical systems: A systematic literature review10.1145/3776549 ↗
3. Research challenges for the security of control systems
4. Brown, L.V. (2008). Computer Security: Principles and Practice, Pearson Prentice Hall.
5. A survey of defense mechanisms against distributed denial of service (DDoS) flooding attacks10.1109/SURV.2013.031413.00127 ↗
6. Security, privacy and trust in Internet of Things: The road ahead10.1016/j.comnet.2014.11.008 ↗
7. Yoachimik, O., and Pacheco, J. (2026, January 03). Q4 DDoS Threat Report: A Record-Setting 31.4 Tbps Attack Caps a Year of Massive DDoS Assaults. 2025. Cloudflare Blog. Available online: https://blog.cloudflare.com/ddos-threat-report-2025-q4/.
8. A survey of data mining and machine learning methods for cyber security intrusion detection10.1109/COMST.2015.2494502 ↗
9. A deep learning approach for intrusion detection using recurrent neural networks10.1109/ACCESS.2017.2762418 ↗
10. Anomaly detection: A survey
11. Deep learning for cyber security intrusion detection: Approaches, datasets, and comparative study
12. Long short-term memory and fuzzy logic for anomaly detection and mitigation in software-defined network environment10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2992044 ↗
13. Canadian Institute for Cybersecurity (2026, January 29). CICIoT2023 Dataset. University of New Brunswick. Available online: https://www.unb.ca/cic/datasets/iotdataset-2023.html.
14. The LOFT attack: Overflowing SDN flow tables at a low rate10.1109/TNET.2022.3225211 ↗
15. Kodyš, M., Lu, Z., Fok, K.W., and Thing, V.L. (2021). Intrusion detection in internet of things using convolutional neural networks. 2021 18th International Conference on Privacy, Security and Trust (PST), IEEE.10.1109/PST52912.2021.9647828 ↗
16. A deep learning approach for network intrusion detection system
17. Afraji, D.M.A.A., Lloret, J., and Peñalver, L. (2025). An integrated hybrid deep learning framework for intrusion detection in IoT and IIoT networks using CNN-LSTM-GRU architecture. Computation, 13.10.3390/computation13090222 ↗
18. Enhancing IoT Security: A Comparative Study of CNN and RNN-Based Anomaly Detection Using the CICIoT2023 Dataset
19. Deep learning for network security: An Attention-CNN-LSTM model for accurate intrusion detection10.1038/s41598-025-07706-y ↗
20. A Comparative Benchmark of Machine and Deep Learning for Cyberattack Detection in IoT Networks
21. A novel deep learning-based intrusion detection system for IoT DDoS security10.1016/j.iot.2024.101336 ↗
22. Ain, N.U., Sardaraz, M., Tahir, M., Abo Elsoud, M.W., and Alourani, A. (2025). Securing IoT networks against DDoS attacks: A hybrid deep learning approach. Sensors, 25.10.3390/s25051346 ↗
23. A novel data preprocessing model for lightweight sensory iot intrusion detection
24. A long short-term memory based approach for detecting cyber attacks in IoT using CIC-IoT2023 dataset10.55056/jec.648 ↗
25. Gueriani, A., Kheddar, H., and Mazari, A.C. (2024). Enhancing IoT security with CNN and LSTM-based intrusion detection systems. 2024 6th International Conference on Pattern Analysis and Intelligent Systems (PAIS), IEEE.10.1109/PAIS62114.2024.10541178 ↗
26. SmartTrust: A hybrid deep learning framework for real-time threat detection in cloud environments using Zero-Trust Architecture10.1186/s13677-025-00764-7 ↗
27. Kharrat, M. (2025). Predefined-time adaptive fuzzy control for nonlinear cyber-physical systems under sensor and actuator attacks. J. Vib. Control.10.1177/10775463251374117 ↗
28. Cybersecurity of industrial cyber-physical systems: A review
29. Peng, S., Tian, J., Zheng, X., Chen, S., and Shu, Z. (2025). DDoS Defense Strategy Based on Blockchain and Unsupervised Learning Techniques in SDN. Future Internet, 17.10.3390/fi17080367 ↗
30. Wang, B., Sun, Q., and Fang, F. (2022). Consensus-based Frequency Control of a Cyber-physical Power System under Two Types of DDoS Attacks. 2022 34th Chinese Control and Decision Conference (CCDC), IEEE.10.1109/CCDC55256.2022.10033924 ↗
31. Scrutinizing security in industrial control systems: An architectural vulnerabilities and communication network perspective10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3394848 ↗
32. DDoS: Distributed denial of service attack in communication standard vulnerabilities in smart grid applications and cyber security with recent developments10.1016/j.egyr.2023.05.184 ↗
33. Seifert, D., and Reza, H. (2016). A security analysis of cyber-physical systems architecture for healthcare. Computers, 5.10.3390/computers5040027 ↗
34. Federated learning for decentralized DDoS attack detection in IoT networks10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3378727 ↗
35. Static Output Feedback Predictive Control for Cyber-Physical System under Denial of Service Attacks
36. Hochreiter, S. (1997). Long Short-Term Memory, Neural Computation MIT-Press.10.1162/neco.1997.9.8.1735 ↗
37. A novel feature-based framework enabling multi-type DDoS attacks detection10.1007/s11280-022-01040-3 ↗
38. Chen, L., Wang, Z., Huo, R., and Huang, T. (2023). An adversarial DBN-LSTM method for detecting and defending against DDoS attacks in SDN environments. Algorithms, 16.10.3390/a16040197 ↗
39. Adaptive DDoS Attack Detection Method Based on Multiple-Kernel Learning10.1155/2018/5198685 ↗
40. Ali, S., Alvi, M.K., Faizullah, S., Khan, M.A., Alshanqiti, A., and Khan, I. (2020). Detecting ddos attack on sdn due to vulnerabilities in openflow. 2019 International Conference on Advances in the Emerging Computing Technologies (AECT), IEEE.10.1109/AECT47998.2020.9194211 ↗
41. Detection of DDoS Attack Using Entropy Approach
42. Employing multi-format log analysis to detect Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) attacks in Software-Defined Networks (SDN)10.1007/s44354-026-00020-7 ↗