MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2591807462

Engineering cybersecurity in cyber physical systems

2016· article· en· W2591807462 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Science and Software Engineering · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyber-physical systemComputer scienceSoftware security assuranceComputer securitySoftwareAnalyticsSoftware engineeringCommand and controlInformation securityData scienceSecurity serviceOperating system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in the interconnected capabilities of cyber physical systems (CPS) affect virtually every engineered system. Today, software approaches dominate all aspects of connecting the physical and cyber worlds in part due to the convergence of computing, control and communications software technologies. Unfortunately, software technologies are more vulnerable to cybersecurity problems than traditional hardware solutions. This workshop aims to develop a research agenda for engineering cybersecurity into cyber physical systems (CPS) through design-time requirements engineering, continuous assurance at runtime, and cognitive security analytics. CPS are distributed, software-intensive smart systems that control tightly integrated computational and physical components. A combination of design-time and runtime techniques are needed to support reasoning about cybersecurity. We advocate a holistic requirements engineering approach, continuous validation with feedback loops supported by models at runtime and networked control, and cognitive security analytics using Watson.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score0.945

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.221 · 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