MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387885864 · doi:10.1109/access.2023.3326751

Validation of a Machine Learning-Based IDS Design Framework Using ORNL Datasets for Power System With SCADA

2023· article· en· W4387885864 on OpenAlexafffund
Marzia Zaman, Darshana Upadhyay, Chung–Horng Lung

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Security and Intrusion Detection
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityCistel Technology (Canada)
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceSCADAMachine learningData pre-processingRandom forestData miningFeature selectionPreprocessorArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems are widely used for remote monitoring and control of industrial processes, such as oil and gas production, power generation, transmission and distribution, and water treatment. Despite the enhanced accessibility, control, and data availability afforded by recent advances in communication technologies, the utilization of these technologies exposes critical infrastructures such as power systems to potential cyber threats. A Machine Learning (ML)-based Intrusion Detection System (IDS) seems promising; however, the development of ML models often requires custom methodologies for data preprocessing and training. This strategic approach is necessary for creating high-performance models that can be robustly evaluated and seamlessly integrated into real-time systems. As a result, we propose an ML-based IDS design framework for a SCADA-based power system incorporating effective modeling aspects, such as dataset preprocessing to ensure accurate representation, data augmentation for achieving a balanced dataset, automated feature selection to reduce dimensionality, and rigorous model training and testing procedures. To substantiate our proposed design framework, we conducted a series of experiments using a publicly available ORNL (Oak Ridge National Laboratory) dataset for . The evaluation process encompasses efficient validation techniques with unseen data. Furthermore, the augmented dataset emerged through the aggregation of readings from four Phasor Measurement Units (PMUs) collected over a specific time span into a unified dataset. Among the assessed classifiers, the Random Forest (RF) model, trained on an augmented and balanced dataset, outperformed others, yielding an F1 score of 94.09% during testing with unseen data.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations22
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicNetwork Security and Intrusion DetectionFrench-language works237,207