MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Application of Feasibility Area for Cybersecurity of Electric Power Systems

2023· article· en· W4387005885 on OpenAlexafffund
Ahmed Abd Elaziz Elsayed, E. Z. Hany Farag, Abdullah Tauqeer, Filza Shahid, Amir Asif

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsElectric power systemComputer sciencePower (physics)PhasorReal-time computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The utilization of digital communication in modern power grids helps deploy the advanced and real-time power system control systems to withstand renewable energy fluctuations. This, however, could open the door to cyberattacks on the communication data. Cybersecurity layers presented by Bad Data Detection (BDD) and pre-occurrence False Data Injection (FDI) detection layers are developed to block these attacks. Such layers, however, cannot guarantee a 100% success rate, and thus, stealthy FDI attacks, which mask the system operation, can penetrate the pre-occurrence layers to change the optimal operation points. To detect the infiltrated stealthy attacks, a new post-occurrence FDI detection layer is proposed in this paper by using the concept of the Feasibility Area (FA), which identifies the region where a power system parameter exits in normal operation conditions using a historical window of data. Deterministic and non-deterministic shapes are used to represent the FA. The state of the power system parameters, such as bus voltage phasors, current phasors, apparent power, and their pattern is utilized to identify the existence of FDI cyberattacks using Pattern Recognition Neural Network (PRNN). The proposed method shows a high performance in detecting stealthy FDI cyberattacks.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.684
Threshold uncertainty score0.202

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSmart Grid Security and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207