Autonomous Haulage Systems in the Mining Industry: Cybersecurity, Communication and Safety Issues and Challenges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current advancement of robotics, especially in Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS), leads to a prominent combination between the mining industry and connected-embedded technologies. This progress has arisen in the form of state-of-the-art automated giant vehicles with Autonomous Haulage Systems (AHS) that can transport ore without human intervention. Like CPS, AHS enable autonomous and/or remote control of physical systems (e.g., mining trucks). Thus, similar to CPS, AHS are also susceptible to cyber attacks such as Wi-Fi De-Auth and GPS attacks. With the use of the AHS, several mining activities have been strengthened due to increasing the efficiency of operations. Such activities require ensuring accurate data collection from which precise information about the state of the mine should be generated in a timely and consistent manner. Consequently, the presence of secure and reliable communications is crucial in making AHS mines safer, productive, and sustainable. This paper aims to identify and discuss the relation between safety of AHS in the mining environment and both cybersecurity and communication as well as highlighting their challenges and open issues. We survey the literature that addressed this aim and discuss its pros and cons and then highlight some open issues. We conclude that addressing cybersecurity issues of AHS can ensure the safety of operations in the mining environment as well as providing reliable communication, which will lead to better safety. Additionally, it was found that new communication technologies, such 5G and LTE, could be adopted in AHS-based systems for mining, but further research is needed to considered related cybersecurity issues and attacks.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".