PIPC: Privacy- and Integrity-Preserving Clustering Analysis for Load Profiling in Smart Grids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Generally, power utilities can utilize smart-meter data to extract load patterns through load-profiling technologies, such as$K$-means clustering. To improve the efficiency of load profiling, both$K$-means clustering and smart-meter data can be outsourced to powerful clouds. However, clouds are not completely trustworthy: private meter data may be used for commercial interests;$K$-means clustering may also be performed with fewer iterations to save computational costs, which violates the integrity of outsourced clustering. In this article, therefore, a secure$K$-means-clustering scheme is proposed, called privacy-preserving and integrity-preserving clustering (PIPC), which aims to protect the privacy and integrity of load profiling. To this end, two techniques are designed: 1) encrypted distance measurement, in which a public comparison matrix is constructed by securely embedding a secret key matrix and 2) integrity assurance, in which a specific Stackelberg game is designed to create economic incentives. The former, as the core of$K$-means clustering, can protect the privacy of meter data. The latter ensures that clouds can obtain the maximum utility only when clouds execute$K$-means clustering in an honest manner, thereby preserving the integrity of outsourced computing. Experimental results demonstrate that PIPC reaches high clustering accuracy and computational efficiency for load profiling while retaining smart-meter data privacy and outsourced-clustering integrity.
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 | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
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".