IP Library Granted Patent US 12,437,192
Granted Patent B1
US 12,437,192 · App. 17/114,107 · Granted Oct 7, 2025

Artificial intelligence system for anomalous activity detection using static and dynamic covariates

Inventors: Matei Stefan Neagu (Iasi, RO); Daniel Voinea (Iasi, RO); Constantin Haralambie Ionescu (Bucharest, RO); Cristina Simionescu (Zalau, RO)
Assignee: Amazon Technologies, Inc.
G06N3/08G06F9/542G06F11/3438G06F18/214G06F21/552G06N3/044
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,437,192
App. No.
17/114,107
Granted
Oct 7, 2025
Kind
B1
Abstract

A training data set which includes event sequences representing actions of respective users of an application, properties of the users, and dynamic attributes associated with events such as the elapsed time between successive events, is prepared. A machine learning model which provides probabilistic predictions of next events of input event sequences is trained using the training data set. A trained version of the model is stored.

Claims (44)

1. A system, comprising:

one or more computing devices;

wherein the one or more computing devices include instructions that upon execution on or across the one or more computing devices cause the one or more computing devices to:

identify a plurality of sources of event records of an application execution environment, wherein a particular event record provides an indication of (a) a user who took an action that resulted in generation of the particular event record and (b) an event identifier;

extract, using the plurality of sources, respective event sequences corresponding to individual users of the application execution environment;

determine, corresponding to individual users corresponding to respective event sequences which have been extracted from the plurality of sources, a respective set of static user attributes, including an indication of a user role with respect to the application execution environment;

prepare a training data set comprising at least (a) the respective event sequences, (b) the respective sets of static user attributes and (c) one or more dynamic attributes associated with individual events of the respective event sequences, wherein a first dynamic attribute pertaining to a particular event of a particular event sequence indicates an elapsed time between the particular event and a preceding event of the particular event sequence;

train, using the training data set, one or more machine learning models to provide, as output, at least a probabilistic prediction of a next event of an input event sequence corresponding to an individual user of the application execution environment, wherein said training comprises providing at least a portion of the training data set to the one or more machine learning models;

determine, using trained versions of the one or more machine learning models, respective anomaly scores corresponding to a plurality of actions of a first user of the application execution environment, wherein the plurality of actions is not represented in the training data set; and

initiate an anomaly response action based at least in part on a result of applying an aggregation algorithm to the respective anomaly scores, wherein the anomaly response action comprises barring further access by the first user.

2. The system as recited in claim 1 , wherein a machine learning model of the one or more machine learning models comprises one or more Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) units.

3. The system as recited in claim 1 , wherein a second dynamic attribute pertaining to the particular event of the particular event sequence comprises an indication of resource usage associated with a user action represented by the particular event.

4. The system as recited in claim 1 , wherein the one or more computing devices include further instructions that upon execution on or across the one or more computing devices cause the one or more computing devices to:

obtain a user session boundary definition; and

utilize, to execute the aggregation algorithm, the user session boundary definition to determine a count of actions of the first user, within a particular session, having anomaly scores which exceed a first threshold, wherein the anomaly response action is based at least in part on a determination that the count exceeds a second threshold.

5. The system as recited in claim 1 , wherein the application execution environment comprises respective sets of resources of a plurality of network-accessible services including a first service and a second service, and wherein the plurality of sources include a first log file of the first service and a second log file of the second service.

6. A computer-implemented method, comprising:

preparing a training data set comprising at least (a) a plurality of event sequences representing actions of respective users of an application, (b) respective sets of user properties of the respective users and (c) one or more dynamic attributes associated with individual events of the plurality of event sequences, wherein a first dynamic attribute pertaining to a particular event of a particular event sequence indicates an elapsed time between the particular event and a preceding event of the particular event sequence;

training, using the training data set, one or more machine learning models to provide, as output, at least a probabilistic prediction of a next event of an input event sequence corresponding to an individual user of the application, wherein said training comprises providing at least a portion of the training data set to the one or more machine learning models; and

initiating an anomaly response action based at least in part on an analysis of (a) one or more actions of a first user of the application and (b) a set of probabilistic predictions obtained from trained versions of the one or more machine learning models, wherein the anomaly response action comprises barring further access by the first user.

7. The computer-implemented method as recited in claim 6 , wherein a first set of user properties of the first user comprises one or more of: (a) a location of the first user, (b) an organizational role of the first user, or (c) a user category to which the first user has been assigned with respect to the application.

8. The computer-implemented method as recited in claim 6 , wherein a second dynamic attribute pertaining to the particular event of the particular event sequence comprises an indication of resource usage associated with a user action represented by the particular event.

9. The computer-implemented method as recited in claim 8 , wherein the indication of resource usage comprises an indication of one or more of: (a) a number of times that a particular data resource accessed in the user action has been accessed by the first user or (b) a number of resources which have been accessed by the first user.

10. The computer-implemented method as recited in claim 6 , further comprising:

determining a plurality of action categories of user actions represented in the plurality of event sequences, including one or more of: (a) read actions, (b) write actions, (c) download actions, (d) upload actions, (e) login actions, or (f) logout actions, wherein a second dynamic attribute pertaining to the particular event of the particular event sequence comprises an indication of an action category of a user action represented by the particular event.

11. The computer-implemented method as recited in claim 6 , further comprising:

obtaining, via one or more programmatic interfaces of an analytics service of a provider network, a model training request, wherein the training of the one or more machine learning models is responsive to the model training request.

12. The computer-implemented method as recited in claim 6 , wherein the analysis of one or more actions and the set of probabilistic predictions comprises:

determining, using the trained versions of the one or more machine learning models, respective anomaly scores corresponding to a plurality of actions of the first user; and

applying an aggregation algorithm to the respective anomaly scores.

13. The computer-implemented method as recited in claim 12 , wherein applying the aggregation algorithm comprises determining a number of anomaly scores of the respective anomaly scores which exceeded a threshold within a time interval.

14. The computer-implemented method as recited in claim 12 , wherein applying the aggregation algorithm comprises determining a number of consecutive actions of the plurality of actions having anomaly scores which exceeded a threshold.

15. The computer-implemented method as recited in claim 6 , wherein the set of probabilistic predictions obtained from trained versions of the one or more machine learning models includes a probabilistic prediction of a timing of an event of an event sequence.

16. One or more non-transitory computer-accessible storage media storing program instructions that when executed on or across one or more processors cause the one or more processors to:

prepare a training data set comprising at least (a) a plurality of event sequences representing actions of respective users of an application, (b) respective sets of user properties of the respective users and (c) one or more dynamic attributes associated with individual events of the plurality of event sequences, wherein a first dynamic attribute pertaining to a particular event of a particular event sequence indicates an elapsed time between the particular event and a preceding event of the particular event sequence;

train, using the training data set, a machine learning model to provide, as output, at least a probabilistic prediction of a next event of an input event sequence corresponding to an individual user of the application, wherein said training comprises providing at least a portion of the training data set to the machine learning model; determine, using a trained version of the machine learning model, respective anomaly scores corresponding to a plurality of actions of a first user of the application; and

initiate an anomaly response action based at least in part on the respective anomaly scores, wherein the anomaly response action comprises barring further access by the first user.

17. The one or more non-transitory computer-accessible storage media as recited in claim 16 , wherein a second dynamic attribute pertaining to the particular event comprises an indication of one or more of: (a) a type of device utilized for the particular event or (b) a network address of a device utilized for the particular event.

18. The one or more non-transitory computer-accessible storage media as recited in claim 16 , storing further program instructions that when executed on or across the one or more processors further cause the one or more processors to:

store a representation of a pattern of anomalous user actions, wherein the pattern is detected based at least in part on an comparison of (a) detected actions of a first user and (b) probabilistic predictions obtained using the trained version of the machine learning model; and

utilize the representation of the pattern to identify additional patterns of anomalous user actions.

19. The one or more non-transitory computer-accessible storage media as recited in claim 16 , storing further program instructions that when executed on or across the one or more processors further cause the one or more processors to:

obtain, via one or more programmatic interfaces, one or more hyper-parameters of the machine learning model.

20. The one or more non-transitory computer-accessible storage media as recited in claim 16 , wherein the machine learning model comprises one or more neural networks.

Assignments (1)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Nov 1, 2022
From: NEAGU, MATEI STEFAN; VOINEA, DANIEL; IONESCU, CONSTANTIN HARALAMBIE; SIMIONESCU, CRISTINA
To: AMAZON TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Reel/Frame 061616/0985 →
References Cited (27)
US 9135559B1 · Chan · 2015 [cited by examiner]
US 11232465B2 · Orr · 2022 [cited by examiner]
US 20160019460A1 · Li · 2016 [cited by examiner]
US 20170118092A1 · Dixon · 2017 [cited by examiner]
US 20200084280A1 · Malhotra · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20200259852A1 · Wolff · 2020 [cited by examiner]
US 20220019935A1 · Ghatage · 2022 [cited by examiner]
Gediminas Adomavicius & Alexander Tuzhilin, “Context-Aware Recommender Systems,” Springer Nature Link, 2010, pp. 217-253. [cited by applicant]
Lei Jimmy Ba, Rich Caruana, “Do Deep Nets Really Need to be Deep?,” Part of Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 27 (NIPS 2014), pp. 1-9. [cited by applicant]
Kai-Wen Cheng, et al., “Video Anomaly Detection and Localization Using Hierarchical Feature Representation and Gaussian Process Regression,” Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition … [cited by applicant]
Min Du, et al., “DeepLog: Anomaly Detection and Diagnosis from System Logs through Deep Learning,” CCS '17: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 1285-1298, https://d… [cited by applicant]
Davyd Gromenko, “Corporate Security in the EU and GDPR: Data breaches in British Airways and The Marriott International,” Nov. 2019, DOI:10.13140/RG.2.2.34290.66240, pages. [cited by applicant]
David J. Hand, “Data Mining: Statistics and More?,” The American Statistician, May 1998, vol. 52, No. 2, pp. 112-118. [cited by applicant]
Richa Handa, A.K. Shrivas, H.S. Hota, “Financial Time Series Forecasting using Back Propagation Neural Network and Deep Learning Architecture,” International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE), ISSN: 2… [cited by applicant]
Sepp Hochreiter, “The Vanishing Gradient Problem During Learning Recurrent Neural Nets and Problem Solutions,” International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 06, No. 02, pp. 107-116 (1… [cited by applicant]
Bing Jiang, et al., “Deep Bottleneck Features for Spoken Language Identification,” PLOS ONE, Open Access, Published: Jul. 1, 2014, pp. 1-11, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0100795. [cited by applicant]
Kevin S. Killourhy, et al., “Comparing anomaly-detection algorithms for keystroke dynamics,” IEEE, 2009, pp. 125-134. [cited by applicant]
Paul Resick, et al., “Recommender Systems,” arch 1997/vol. 40, No. 3 Communications of the ACM, pp. 56-58. [cited by applicant]
Usman Asghar Sandhu, et al. “A Survey of Intrusion Detection & Prevention Techniques,” 2011 International Conference on Information Communication and Management, IPCSIT vol. 16 (2011) © (2011) IACSIT Press, Singapore, p… [cited by applicant]
S. T. Sarasamma, Q. A. Zhu and J. Huff, “Hierarchical Kohonenen net for anomaly detection in network security,” in IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics), vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 302-312, A… [cited by applicant]
Dominique T. Shipmon, et al., “Time Series Anomaly Detection; Detection of anomalous drops with limited features and sparse examples in noisy highly periodic data,” Xiv:1708.03665v1, 2017, pp. 1-9. [cited by applicant]
Keng L. Siau, et al., “Impact of Artificial Intelligence, Robotics, and Machine Learning on Sales and Marketing,” AIS Electronic Library (AISeL), MWAIS 2017 Proceedings, pp. 1-2. [cited by applicant]
M.T. Siponen, “Secure-system design methods: evolution and future directions,” IT Professional Magazine; Washington vol. 8, Iss. 3, (May/Jun. 2006): pp. 40-44. DOI:10.1109/MITP.2006.73. [cited by applicant]
Sundsøy, P., Bjelland, J., Iqbal, A.M., Pentland, A.., de Montjoye, YA. (2014). Big Data-Driven Marketing: How Machine Learning Outperforms Marketers' Gut-Feeling. In: Kennedy, W.G., Agarwal, N., Yang, S.J. (eds) Social… [cited by applicant]
Lawrence . Trautman and Peter C. Ormerod, Corporate Directors' and Officers' Cybersecurity Standard of Care: the Yahoo Data Breach, 66 Am. U. L. Rev. 1231 (2016-2017), pp. 1231-1291. [cited by applicant]
J. Yang, C. Zhou, S. Yang, H. Xu and B. Hu, “Anomaly Detection Based on Zone Partition for Security Protection of Industrial Cyber-Physical Systems,” in IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 65, No. 5, pp. 4… [cited by applicant]
John Yeo, Trustwave, “Using penetration testing to enhance your company's security,” Computer Fraud & Security vol. 2013, Issue 4, Apr. 2013, pp. 17-20. [cited by applicant]
Cited By (2)
US 12,608,928 US 12,675,577