MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3153388338 · doi:10.1049/cps2.12011

Game theoretic vulnerability management for secondary frequency control of islanded microgrids against false data injection attacks

2021· article· en· W3153388338 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Cyber-Physical Systems Theory & Applications · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMicrogridVulnerability (computing)Computer scienceControllabilityVulnerability indexComputer securityWirelessGame theoryControl (management)TelecommunicationsMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract While most existing works ignore securing the communication of control signals in microgrids' centralized secondary frequency control, here, a stochastic game between the microgrid control centre (MGCC) and the attacker for enhancing the vulnerability of the MGCC to false data injection (FDI) attack (wireless spoof attack) is proposed. The vulnerability to wireless spoof attack is assessed based on the controllability Gramian when the FDI attack is modelled as the malicious control input that aims to drive the microgrid state to undesired values. In the formulated zero‐sum two‐player Markov game, the state is uniquely associated with the vulnerability index defined by the trace of the controllability Gramian with respect to the attack input. Moreover, the utility function of the stochastic game includes not only the costs related to conducting spoof attack and encryption actions but also the possible remedy costs associated with the resulted vulnerability levels. In turn, the potential impacts of the cyber‐layer action choices on the performance of the physical power system are considered when designing the optimal attack and defence strategies. A distribution feeder system with four distributed generators (DGs) is used for simulation studies. The vulnerability assessment results show that the vulnerability level increases when the attacker compromises more on the communication links between the MGCC and DGs. In the simulated game, mixed stationary attack and defence strategies are predominate when considering the uncertainty of the other player.

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 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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.645
Threshold uncertainty score0.891

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.242 · 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