A Survey on Key Management and Authentication Approaches in Smart Metering Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The implementation of the smart grid (SG) and cyber-physical systems (CPS) greatly enhances the safety, reliability, and efficiency of energy production and distribution. Smart grids rely on smart meters (SMs) in converting the power grids (PGs) in a smart and reliable way. However, the proper operation of these systems needs to protect them against attack attempts and unauthorized entities. In this regard, key-management and authentication mechanisms can play a significant role. In this paper, we shed light on the importance of these mechanisms, clarifying the main efforts presented in the context of the literature. First, we address the main intelligent attacks affecting the SGs. Secondly, the main terms of cryptography are addressed. Thirdly, we summarize the common proposed key-management techniques with a suitable critique showing their pros and cons. Fourth, we introduce the effective paradigms of authentication in the state of the art. Fifth, the common two tools for verifying the security and integrity of protocols are presented. Sixth, the relevant research challenges are addressed to achieve trusted smart grids and protect their SMs against attack manipulations and unauthorized entities with a future vision. Accordingly, this survey can facilitate the efforts exerted by interested researchers in this regard.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".