MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899962524 · doi:10.1109/tsmc.2018.2875250

Input-Based Event-Triggering Consensus of Multiagent Systems Under Denial-of-Service Attacks

2018· article· en· W2899962524 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Systems · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province
KeywordsDenial-of-service attackEvent (particle physics)Computer scienceComputer securityMulti-agent systemConsensusDenialDistributed computingArtificial intelligencePsychologyWorld Wide WebPhysicsThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper applies an input-based triggering approach to investigate the secure consensus problem in multiagent systems under denial-of-service (DoS) attacks. The DoS attacks are based on the time-sequence fashion and occur aperiodically in an unknown attack strategy, which can usually damage the control channels executed by an intelligent adversary. A novel event-triggered control scheme on the basis of the relative interagent state is developed under the DoS attacks, by designing a link-based estimator to estimate the relative interagent state between intermitted communication instead of the absolute state. Compared with most of the existing work on the design of the triggering condition related to the state measurement error, the proposed triggering condition is designed based on the control input signal from the view of privacy protection, which can avoid continuous sampling for every agent. Besides, the attack frequency and attack duration of DoS attacks are analyzed and the secure consensus is reachable provided that the attack frequency and attack duration satisfy some certain conditions under the proposed control algorithm. “Zeno phenomenon” does not exhibit by proving that there exist different positive lower bounds corresponding to different link-based triggering conditions. Finally, the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm is verified by a numerical example.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.230 · 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