MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323644080 · doi:10.1109/comst.2023.3251899

Security of Wide-Area Monitoring, Protection, and Control (WAMPAC) Systems of the Smart Grid: A Survey on Challenges and Opportunities

2023· article· en· W4323644080 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSmart gridComputer securityScope (computer science)Reliability (semiconductor)Risk analysis (engineering)Attack surfaceSecurity controlsCritical infrastructureDomain (mathematical analysis)GridControl (management)Power (physics)EngineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The evolution of power generation systems, along with their related increase in complexity, led to the critical necessity of Wide-Area Monitoring, Protection, and Control (WAMPAC) systems in today’s smart grid. Recent developments in smart measurement devices coupled with data communication technologies allow for significant improvements in power systems’ reliability, efficiency, and security. These technological advancements make WAMPAC systems of significant practical interest. However, the geographically distributed nature of such systems increases the potential attack surface and the risk of critical vulnerabilities. Thus, it is of paramount importance to identify the related threats and vulnerabilities as well as the prominent solutions relevant to WAMPAC systems. Consequently, this paper aims to provide a comprehensive review of WAMPAC security aspects along with the state-of-the-art research initiatives addressing such aspects. Specifically, this paper provides critical taxonomies of the cyber-security scope of WAMPAC that guide the accompanying survey of the recent studies on the WAMPAC security domain. As such, this article aims to pave the way for prospective researchers to pursue further studies in areas that require in-depth investigation into the security, reliability, and efficiency of WAMPAC as the backbone of smart grids.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.258
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.140 · 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