RQ-CEASE: A Resilient Quantized Collaborative Event-Triggered Average-Consensus Sampled-Data Framework Under Denial of Service Attack
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
Referred to as the RQ-CEASE, this article proposes a resilient framework for quantized, event-triggered (ET), sampled-data, average consensus in multiagent systems subject to denial of service (DoS) attacks. The DoS attacks typically attempt to block the measurement and communication channels in the network. Two different ET approaches are considered in RQ-CEASE based on whether the ET threshold is dependent or independent of the state dynamics. For each approach, we analytically derive operating conditions (bounds) for the sampling period and ET design parameter guaranteeing the input-to-state stability (ISS) of the network under DoS attacks. In addition, upper bounds for duration and frequency of DoS attacks are derived within which the network remains operational. For each approach, the maximum possible error from the average consensus value is derived. The resilience of the two RQ-CEASE approaches to DoS attacks, as well as their steady-state consensus error, and transmission savings are compared both analytically and using simulations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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