MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Impact of Cybersecurity on Siting Distributed Generation Units in AC Power Systems

2020· article· en· W3128218187 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jay Nayak, Irfan Al‐Anbagi

Bibliographic record

Venue2020 IEEE Electric Power and Energy Conference (EPEC) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer securityVulnerability (computing)Computer scienceGridElectric power systemSmart gridCyber-attackPower gridVulnerability assessmentCritical infrastructurePower (physics)Constraint (computer-aided design)EngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vulnerabilities of the smart grid to cyberattacks can pose dangerous threats to the assets connected to the power network. It is important to identify cyber vulnerabilities in power systems and implement effective defense mechanisms to prevent cyber threats on these assets. Existing research works have not shown effective techniques for the vulnerability assessment and countermeasures against cyberattacks for the AC power systems. In this paper, we emphasize the impact of cybersecurity on siting distributed generation (DG) units in the AC power grid. We present an AC-based false data injection (FDI) attack model to analyze the cyber vulnerabilities of the system and propose an optimal defense strategy to prevent cyber incidents on these units. We perform experiments on the SaskPower network of Saskatchewan, Canada, to demonstrate the optimal siting for DG units under the cybersecurity constraint. Our simulation results obtained for the SaskPower grid show the effectiveness of our proposed approaches to analyze the cyber vulnerabilities of the power grid and find secure sites for the DG units in Saskatchewan.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.363
Threshold uncertainty score0.625

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2020 IEEE Electric Power and Energy Conference (EPEC)Same topicSmart Grid Security and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207