Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modern large engineered network systems normally work in cooperation and incorporate dependencies between their components for purposes of efficiency and regulation. Such dependencies may become a major risk since they can cause small-scale failures to propagate throughout the system. Thus, the dependent nodes could be a natural target for malicious attacks that aim to exploit these vulnerabilities. Here we consider a type of targeted attack that is based on the dependencies between the networks. We study strategies of attacks that range from dependency-first to dependency-last, where a fraction 1-p of the nodes with dependency links, or nodes without dependency links, respectively, are initially attacked. We systematically analyze, both analytically and numerically, the percolation transition of partially interdependent networks, where a fraction q of the nodes in each network are dependent on nodes in the other network. We find that for a broad range of dependency strength q, the "dependency-first" attack strategy is actually less effective, in terms of lower critical percolation threshold p_{c}, compared with random attacks of the same size. In contrast, the "dependency-last" attack strategy is more effective, i.e., higher p_{c}, compared with a random attack. This effect is explained by exploring the dynamics of the cascading failures initiated by dependency-based attacks. We show that while "dependency-first" strategy increases the short-term impact of the initial attack, in the long term the cascade slows down compared with the case of random attacks and vice versa for "dependency-last." Our results demonstrate that the effectiveness of attack strategies over a system of interdependent networks should be evaluated not only by the immediate impact but mainly by the accumulated damage during the process of cascading failures. This highlights the importance of understanding the dynamics of avalanches that may occur due to different scenarios of failures in order to design resilient critical infrastructures.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".