mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

SemiScope: Disentangling Classifier Tuning and Joint Optimization in Semi-Supervised Security Classification

arXiv 2607.00113 ↗First posted 30 Jun 2026cs.LGcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

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.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 45 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Jun 2026.

Builds on

14 of 45 references.

References · 14

  1. 2016XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting Systemcited by 5,120
  2. 2019Optuna: A Next-generation Hyperparameter Optimization Frameworkcited by 2,455
  3. 2020FixMatch: Simplifying Semi-Supervised Learning with Consistency and Confidencecited by 2,080
  4. 2022TabPFN: A Transformer That Solves Small Tabular Classification Problems in a Secondcited by 643
  5. 2019Label Propagation for Deep Semi-supervised Learningcited by 287
  6. 2022FreeMatch: Self-adaptive Thresholding for Semi-supervised Learningcited by 232
  7. 2021SCARF: Self-Supervised Contrastive Learning using Random Feature Corruptioncited by 151
  8. 2019FLAML: A Fast and Lightweight AutoML Librarycited by 104
  9. 2021SubTab: Subsetting Features of Tabular Data for Self-Supervised Representation Learningcited by 101
  10. 2020Dos and Don'ts of Machine Learning in Computer Securitycited by 98
  11. 2018Finding Faster Configurations using FLASHcited by 32
  12. 2017Transfer Learning for Performance Modeling of Configurable Systems: An Exploratory Analysiscited by 20
2 more
  1. 2019Better Data Labelling with EMBLEM (and how that Impacts Defect Prediction)cited by 13
  2. 2022Reducing the Cost of Training Security Classifier (via Optimized Semi-Supervised Learning)cited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.