A Study on the Use of Unsupervised, Supervised, and Semi-supervised Modeling for Jamming Detection and Classification in Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

In this work, first, unsupervised machine learning is proposed as a study for detecting and classifying jamming attacks targeting unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) operating at a 2.4 GHz band. Three scenarios are developed with a dataset of samples extracted from meticulous experimental routines using various unsupervised learning algorithms, namely K-means, density-based spatial clustering of applications with noise (DBSCAN), agglomerative clustering (AGG) and Gaussian mixture model (GMM). These routines characterize attack scenarios entailing barrage (BA), single- tone (ST), successive-pulse (SP), and protocol-aware (PA) jamming in three different settings. In the first setting, all extracted features from the original dataset are used (i.e., nine in total). In the second setting, Spearman correlation is implemented to reduce the number of these features. In the third setting, principal component analysis (PCA) is utilized to reduce the dimensionality of the dataset to minimize complexity. The metrics used to compare the algorithms are homogeneity, completeness, v-measure, adjusted mutual information (AMI) and adjusted rank index (ARI). The optimum model scored 1.00, 0.949, 0.791, 0.722, and 0.791, respectively, allowing the detection and classification of these four jamming types with an acceptable degree of confidence.

Second, following a different study, supervised learning (i.e., random forest modeling) is developed to achieve a binary classification to ensure accurate clustering of samples into two distinct classes: clean and jamming. Following this supervised-based classification, two-class and three-class unsupervised learning is implemented considering three of the four jamming types: BA, ST, and SP. In this initial step, the four aforementioned algorithms are used. This newly developed study is intended to facilitate the visualization of the performance of each algorithm, for example, AGG performs a homogeneity of 1.0, a completeness of 0.950, a V-measure of 0.713, an ARI of 0.557 and an AMI of 0.713, and GMM generates 1, 0.771, 0.645, 0.536 and 0.644, respectively. Lastly, to improve the classification of this study, semi-supervised learning is adopted instead of unsupervised learning considering the same algorithms and dataset. In this case, GMM achieves results of 1, 0.688, 0.688, 0.786 and 0.688 whereas DBSCAN achieves 0, 0.036, 0.028, 0.018, 0.028 for homogeneity, completeness, V-measure, ARI and AMI respectively. Overall, this unsupervised learning is approached as a method for jamming classification, addressing the challenge of identifying newly introduced samples.