Communication security for smart grid distribution networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The operation and control of the next generation electrical grids will depend on a complex network of computers, software, and communication technologies. Being compromised by a malicious adversary would cause significant damage, including extended power outages and destruction of electrical equipment. Moreover, the implementation of the smart grid will include the deployment of many new enabling technologies such as advanced sensors and metering, and the integration of distributed generation resources. Such technologies and various others will require the addition and utilization of multiple communication mechanisms and infrastructures that may suffer from serious cyber vulnerabilities. These need to be addressed in order to increase the security and thus the greatest adoption and success of the smart grid. In this article, we focus on the communication security aspect, which deals with the distribution component of the smart grid. Consequently, we target the network security of the advanced metering infrastructure coupled with the data communication toward the transmission infrastructure. We discuss the security and feasibility aspects of possible communication mechanisms that could be adopted on that subpart of the grid. By accomplishing this, the correlated vulnerabilities in these systems could be remediated, and associated risks may be mitigated for the purpose of enhancing the cyber security of the future electric grid.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".