MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127512607 · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2003.814909

Software implementation of online risk-based security assessment

2003· article· en· W2127512607 on OpenAlexaff
Ming Ni, James D. McCalley, Vijay Vittal, Scott Greene, Chee‐Wooi Ten, Vijaya Ganugula, T. Tayyib

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Systems · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsPricewaterhouseCoopers (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceVisualizationSoftware security assuranceSoftwareProbabilistic risk assessmentProbabilistic logicSecurity managementNetwork securityRisk managementRisk analysis (engineering)Computer securityRisk assessmentSoftware engineeringReliability engineeringData miningInformation securityEngineeringSecurity serviceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes software implementation for online risk-based security assessment which computes indices based on probabilistic risk for use by operators in the control room to assess system security levels as a function of existing and near-future network conditions. The paper focuses on speed enhancement techniques that are essential for online application and result visualization methods that offer clear and meaningful ways to enhance human assimilation and comprehension of security levels. Results of testing on a series of 1600 bus power flow models retrieved from the energy management system of a large US utility are presented and serve to illustrate the benefits of the software.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations98
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power SystemsSame topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207