跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+4069新增论文
+3686其中 AI 相关
+88已有论文修订
+99新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-05 23:43 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-05 12:13各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-05 00:01 — 2026-11-06 00:01(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-05 23:43最近发现新增版本:2026-11-05 12:13库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-05 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

15,949 已收录论文13,765 AI 相关3,571 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-05 23:41(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2610.39351

Measuring Duplication, Leakage, and Rendering Dependence in Malware-as-Image Benchmarks

Stefan Larson, Kevin Leach

Classifying malware binaries rendered as images is a popular approach to malware family identification, and papers on the standard benchmarks for this task report accuracies of 97-99%. In this paper we audit ten of these benchmarks for near-duplicate images and test-train leakage, and retrain standard classifiers under naive and content-aware splits. Deduplicating by file hash, which is the standard practice, does not prevent leakage, because distinct binaries render to identical images. Deduplicating on image content reduces top-1 accuracy by up to 8 points and macro-F1 by up to 15 points on the released benchmarks we find leaky. The rendering step also adds duplication, since byteplots of the same binaries contain 19.7% near-duplicates where static feature vectors contain 2.2%, and changing the width at which bytes are wrapped into rows reduces accuracy by 20 to 33 points, although no byte changes. We recommend that content-level duplication and a non-image baseline be reported alongside accuracy.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.CR
arXiv ↗PDF ↗