A Distributed Security SDN Cluster Architecture for Smart Grid Based on Blockchain Technology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes a smart grid distributed security architecture based on blockchain technology and SDN cluster structure, referred to as ClusterBlock model, which combines the advantages of two emerging technologies, blockchain and SDN. The blockchain technology allows for distributed peer-to-peer networks, where the network can ensure the trusted interaction of untrusted nodes in the network. At the same time, this article adopts the design of an SDN controller distributed cluster to avoid single point of failure and balance the load between equipment and the controller. A cluster head was selected in each SDN cluster, and it was used as a blockchain node to construct an SDN cluster head blockchain. By combining blockchain technology, the security and privacy of the SDN communication network can be enhanced. At the same time, this paper designs a distributed control strategy and network attack detection algorithm based on blockchain consensus and introduces the Jaccard similarity coefficient to detect the network attacks. Finally, this paper evaluates the ClusterBlock model and the existing model based on the OpenFlow protocol through simulation experiments and compares the security performance. The evaluation results show that the ClusterBlock model has more stable bandwidth and stronger security performance in the face of DDoS attacks of the same scale.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".