MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Real-time Quantitative Framework for Survivability Evaluation of Smart Grids

2023· article· en· W4387005704 on OpenAlexafffund
Abolfazl Rahiminejad, Mohsen Ghafouri, Ribal Atallah, Arash Mohammadi, Mourad Debbabi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecConcordia University
FundersHydro-Québec
KeywordsSurvivabilityComputer scienceDistributed computingReliability engineeringComputer networkEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Responding to high impact events, such as cyberattacks, during the first phase of resilience, i.e., survive, plays an important role in a system resilience enhancement. To this end, a real-time quantitative framework is highly needed. Motivated by this, this paper proposes a novel real-time cyber-physical resilience-based survivability metric for smart grids’ survivability assessment. The proposed method takes into account the survivability of both the electrical, i.e., physical, and cyber systems. A survivability margin is established for Power-side Survivability (PsS) to monitor the power system’s capacity to maintain the functionality of its critical components. Available Generation Capacity (AGC) and Network Accordant Connectivity (NAC) are factors that are considered while calculating PsS. Based on the available pathways between the Human-Machine Interface (HMI) and Intelligent Electronic Devices (IEDs) in a substation, the Cyber-side Survivability (CsS) is calculated for a given cyber configuration. The computational complexity of the metric calculation limits the metric to real-time measurement. To address this issue, the Histogram-based Gradient Boosting Regression Tree (HGBRT) model is used to forecast the metric depending on system circumstances. To demonstrate its efficacy, the proposed metric is tested on the PJM 5-bus system.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.282 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSmart Grid Security and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207