MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037922012 · doi:10.1109/tac.2020.3004326

Setpoint Attack Detection in Cyber-Physical Systems

2020· article· en· W3037922012 on OpenAlexaff
Walter Lúcia, Kian Gheitasi, Mohsen Ghaderi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSetpointComputer scienceExploitController (irrigation)Cyber-physical systemSIGNAL (programming language)Control systemControl theory (sociology)DetectorReal-time computingControl (management)EngineeringComputer securityArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we face the problem of detecting setpoint attacks in networked control systems. We consider a setup where the reference signal (also known as setpoint) is generated by a control center remotely located with respect to a standard feedback controller. In this scenario, an attacker with sufficient resources can exploit the communication channel to alter the setpoint signal and ultimately affect the tracking performance of the control system. With respect to this problem, we propose a novel distributed control architecture that, taking advantage of peculiar capabilities of the command governor control paradigm, enables the detection of reference attacks. We formally prove that for constrained linear systems such detector exists. Moreover, by limiting the attacker's disclosure resources with superimposed cryptographically secure pseudorandom signals, we show that the absence of advanced stealthy attacks is also ensured. Finally, a solid numerical simulation investigating setpoint attacks on the flight control system of a single-engine fighter is presented to provide tangible evidence of the features of the presented methodology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Automatic ControlSame topicSmart Grid Security and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207