MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4287667853 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2009.06196

Cyber Attack and Machine Induced Fault Detection and Isolation Methodologies for Cyber-Physical Systems

2020· preprint· en· W4287667853 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mahdi Taheri, K. Khorasani, Iman Shames, Nader Meskin

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQatar National Research FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistère de la Défense NationaleFonds National de la Recherche LuxembourgQatar Foundation
KeywordsCyber-physical systemAdversaryComputer scienceIsolation (microbiology)Fault detection and isolationComputer securityReplay attackCyber-attackObserver (physics)ActuatorDetectorCovertReal-time computingAuthentication (law)Artificial intelligenceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the problem of simultaneous cyber attack and fault detection and isolation (CAFDI) in cyber-physical systems (CPS) is studied. The proposed solution methodology consists of two filters on the plant and the command and control (C\&C) sides of the CPS and an unknown input observer (UIO) based detector on the plant side. Conditions under which the proposed methodology can detect deception attacks, such as covert attacks, zero dynamics attacks, and replay attacks are characterized. An advantage of the proposed methodology is that one does not require a fully secured communication link which implies that the communication link can be compromised by the adversary while it is used to transmit the C\&C side observer estimates. Also, it is assumed that adversaries have access to parameters of the system, filters, and the UIO-based detector, however, they do not have access to all the communication link channels. Conditions under which, using the communication link cyber attacks, the adversary cannot eliminate the impact of actuator and sensor cyber attacks are investigated. To illustrate the capabilities and effectiveness of the proposed CAFDI methodologies, simulation case studies are provided and comparisons with detection methods that are available in the literature are included to demonstrate the advantages and benefits of our proposed solutions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.089 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicSmart Grid Security and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207