MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389454801 · doi:10.1016/j.eng.2023.10.007

Ensuring Secure Platooning of Constrained Intelligent and Connected Vehicles Against Byzantine Attacks: A Distributed MPC Framework

2023· article· en· W4389454801 on OpenAlexafffund
Henglai Wei, Hui Zhang, Kamal AI-Haddad, Yang Shi

Bibliographic record

VenueEngineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsComputer securityByzantine architectureComputer scienceComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates resilient platoon control for constrained intelligent and connected vehicles (ICVs) against F-local Byzantine attacks. We introduce a resilient distributed model-predictive platooning control framework for such ICVs. This framework seamlessly integrates the predesigned optimal control with distributed model predictive control (DMPC) optimization and introduces a unique distributed attack detector to ensure the reliability of the transmitted information among vehicles. Notably, our strategy uses previously broadcasted information and a specialized convex set, termed the “resilience set,” to identify unreliable data. This approach significantly eases graph robustness prerequisites, requiring only an (F + 1)-robust graph, in contrast to the established mean sequence reduced algorithms, which require a minimum (2F + 1)-robust graph. Additionally, we introduce a verification algorithm to restore trust in vehicles under minor attacks, further reducing communication network robustness. Our analysis demonstrates the recursive feasibility of the DMPC optimization. Furthermore, the proposed method achieves exceptional control performance by minimizing the discrepancies between the DMPC control inputs and predesigned platoon control inputs, while ensuring constraint compliance and cybersecurity. Simulation results verified the effectiveness of our theoretical findings.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations45
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEngineeringSame topicAdvanced Control Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207