Home > CSC-OpenAccess Library > Manuscript Information
EXPLORE PUBLICATIONS BY COUNTRIES |
![]() |
| EUROPE | |
| MIDDLE EAST | |
| ASIA | |
| AFRICA | |
| ............................. | |
| United States of America | |
| United Kingdom | |
| Canada | |
| Australia | |
| Italy | |
| France | |
| Brazil | |
| Germany | |
| Malaysia | |
| Turkey | |
| China | |
| Taiwan | |
| Japan | |
| Saudi Arabia | |
| Jordan | |
| Egypt | |
| United Arab Emirates | |
| India | |
| Nigeria | |
AI-Driven Threat Intelligence Platforms for Predictive Cyber Defense and Zero-Day Vulnerability Mitigation
Satyanarayana Gadiraju, Sauhard Bhatt
Pages - 200 - 209 | Revised - 15-12-2025 | Published - 31-12-2025
MORE INFORMATION
KEYWORDS
Predictive Cybersecurity, Threat Intelligence, Artificial Intelligence, Zero-Day Vulnerability, Automated Defense.
ABSTRACT
Traditional, reactive security postures are no longer enough to defend against the increasingly
sophisticated cyber threats we face – particularly zero-day attacks. This article presents an AIBased
Threat Intelligence Platform that provides predictive posture for Cyber Defense. The
system goes beyond signature-based detection by collecting and analyzing comprehensive,
multi-modal datasets to predict and neutralize threats before they materialize. In this paper, we
propose a new approach which combines internal network behavior analysis with external
unstructured data intelligence. The performance of the platform was demonstrated on a dedicated
curated dataset, ZDA-NetTraffic-459, including 459 examples representing both normal traffic
and artificial zero-day exploit signatures. The prototype was Python-based and utilized state-ofthe-
art computational libraries for data crunching and pattern recognition, using a graph database
to model multi-dimensional interactions between threat-actors. We demonstrate that our AIbased
system can maintain the same 94.5% general accuracy in predicting of novel threats
without the need for reannotation, therefore effectively reducing detection time from days to
seconds while keeping a false positive rate below 2.1%. This paper shows that there is a
workable transition from reactive incident response to predictive, proactive defense that can
counter previously unknown vulnerabilities.
| "Role of AI in cyber security through anomaly detection and predictive analysis." (2023). Journal of Information and Education Research, 3(2). https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10739223. | |
| Li, J.-H. (2018). Cyber security meets artificial intelligence: A survey. Frontiers of Information Technology & Electronic Engineering, 19(12), 1462-1474. https://doi.org/10.1631/FITEE.1800573 | |
| Mohamed, N. (2023). Current trends in AI and ML for cybersecurity: A state-of-the-art survey. Cogent Engineering. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10420246. | |
| Morovat, K., & Panda, B. (2020). A survey of artificial intelligence in cybersecurity. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Science and Computational Intelligence (CSCI) (pp. 109-115). https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/11108618. | |
| Musa, N. S., Mirza, N. M., Rafique, S. H., Abdallah, A. M., & Murugan, T. (2024). Machine learning and deep learning techniques for distributed denial of service anomaly detection in software defined networks—Current research solutions. IEEE Access, 12, 17982-18011. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3360868. | |
| Ozkan-Okay, M., Akin, E., Aslan, Ö., Kosunalp, S., Iliev, T., Stoyanov, I., & Beloev, I. (2024). A comprehensive survey: Evaluating the efficiency of artificial intelligence and machine learning techniques on cyber security solutions. IEEE Access, 12, 12229-12256. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3355547. | |
| Parizad, A., & Hatziadoniu, C. J. (2022). Cyber-attack detection using principal component analysis and noisy clustering algorithms: A collaborative machine learning-based framework. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 13(6), 4848-4861. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9778203. | |
| Parkar, P., & Bilimoria, A. (2021). A survey on cyber security IDS using ML methods. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Control Systems (ICICCS) (pp. 352-360). https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9432210. | |
| R. Kaur, D. Gabrijelčič, & T. Klobučar. (2023). Artificial intelligence for cybersecurity: Literature review and future research directions. Information Fusion. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10942377. | |
| Rodriguez, E., Otero, B., Gutierrez, N., & Canal, R. (2021). A survey of deep learning techniques for cybersecurity in mobile networks. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 23(3), 1920-1955. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9447833. | |
| Sangwan, R. S., Badr, Y., & Srinivasan, S. M. (2023). Cybersecurity for AI systems: A survey. Journal of Cybersecurity and Privacy, 3(2), 166-190. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/11133642. | |
| Sarker, I. H. (2021). CyberLearning: Effectiveness analysis of machine learning security modeling to detect cyber-anomalies and multi-attacks. Internet of Things, 14, 100393. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9697520. | |
| Sarker, I. H., Kayes, A. S. M., Badsha, S., Alqahtani, H., Watters, P., & Ng, A. (2020). Cybersecurity data science: An overview from machine learning perspective. Journal of Big Data. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/11168706. | |
Mr. Satyanarayana Gadiraju
Independent Researcher, Avenel, NJ, 07001 - United States of America
Mr. Sauhard Bhatt
Independent Researcher, Cumming, Georgia, 30041 - United States of America
|
|
|
|
| View all special issues >> | |
|
|



