Deep Learning Detection of Electricity Theft Cyber-Attacks in Renewable Distributed Generation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unlike the existing research that focuses on detecting electricity theft cyber-attacks in the consumption domain, this paper investigates electricity thefts at the distributed generation (DG) domain. In this attack, malicious customers hack into the smart meters monitoring their renewable-based DG units and manipulate their readings to claim higher supplied energy to the grid and hence falsely overcharge the utility company. Deep machine learning is investigated to detect such a malicious behavior. We aim to answer three main questions in this paper: a) What are the cyber-attack functions that can be applied by malicious customers to the generation data in order to falsely overcharge the utility company? b) What sources of data can be used in order to detect these cyber-attacks by the utility company? c) Which deep machine learning-model should be used in order to detect these cyber-attacks? Our investigation revealed that integrating various data from the DG smart meters, meteorological reports, and SCADA metering points in the training of a deep convolutional-recurrent neural network offers the highest detection rate (99.3%) and lowest false alarm (0.22%).
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".