Adaptive Control for Security and Resilience of Networked Cyber-Physical Systems: Where Are We?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cyber-Physical Systems (CPSs), a class of complex intelligent systems, are considered the backbone of Industry 4.0. They aim to achieve large-scale, networked control of dynamical systems and processes such as electricity and gas distribution networks and deliver pervasive information services by combining state-of-the-art computing, communication, and control technologies. However, CPSs are often highly nonlinear and uncertain, and their intrinsic reliance on open communication platforms increases their vulnerability to security threats, which entails additional challenges to conventional control design approaches. Indeed, sensor measurements and control command signals, whose integrity plays a critical role in correct controller design, may be interrupted or falsely modified when broadcasted on wireless communication channels due to cyber attacks. This can have a catastrophic impact on CPS performance. In this paper, we first conduct a thorough analysis of recently developed secure and resilient control approaches leveraging the solid foundations of adaptive control theory to achieve security and resilience in networked CPSs against sensor and actuator attacks. Then, we discuss the limitations of current adaptive control strategies and present several future research directions in this field.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".