Dynamic Heterogeneous Redundancy-Based Joint Safety and Security for Connected Automated Vehicles: Preliminary Simulation and Field Test Results
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For connected automated vehicles (CAVs), safety and security are two interrelated critical issues since many in-vehicle components are both safety critical and security critical. To achieve both safety and security in the presence of functional failures or cyberattacks, this article proposes a dynamic heterogeneous redundancy (DHR) scheme for CAVs. The basic idea is that each safety- and security-critical in-vehicle component should employ a DHR architecture, which is constructed by multiple heterogeneous executors with the same function. With redundancy, the functional safety can be achieved when one executor fails. Meanwhile, based on the principle that the probability is extremely low that two or more heterogeneous executors with the same function will fail for the same vulnerability, security can be ensured by using simple consensus mechanisms to detect abnormal executors caused by any cyberattacks. A DHR prototype has been designed and installed on an automated bus. Test results show that the proposed DHR is effective in enhancing both safety and security for CAVs.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 it