The state of the art in critical infrastructure protection: a framework for convergence
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The protection of critical infrastructure systems has recently become a major concern for many countries. This is due to the effect of these systems on the daily lives of all citizens and the high possibility of disruption because of their complex structure and hidden interdependencies, which subsequently attract the attention of many researchers and scientists. The investigations of researchers have encompassed issues of national security, policymaking, infrastructure system organisation, and behaviour analysis and modelling. In this paper, we look into the latter subject and explore the attempts that have been made. Based on the available schemes and the requirements of this area, we propose a five-dimensional framework that introduces the major research necessities in this field. Among the various available schemes, we study ten of the most recently developed and/or influential systems. A comparison of these schemes based on the features of our proposed framework is made. The comparison allows us to conclude our examination with the identification of current research strengths and guidelines for future work.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it