MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390465979 · doi:10.3390/smartcities7010005

Implementation of a Trust-Based Framework for Substation Defense in the Smart Grid

2023· article· en· W4390465979 on OpenAlexafffund
Kwasi Boakye-Boateng, Ali A. Ghorbani, Arash Habibi Lashkari

Bibliographic record

VenueSmart Cities · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersAtlantic Canada Opportunities Agency
KeywordsTestbedModbusComputer securityComputer scienceEmulationSCADAIEC 61850Cyber-attackCritical infrastructureResilience (materials science)Smart gridIntrusion detection systemGridEmbedded systemComputer networkEngineeringCommunications protocolAutomation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Smart Grid is a cyber-integrated power grid that manages electricity generation, transmission, and distribution to consumers and central to its functioning is the substation. However, integrating cyber-infrastructure into the substation has increased its attack surface. Notably, sophisticated attacks such as the PipeDream APT exploit multiple device protocols, such as Modbus, DNP3, and IEC61850. The substation’s constraints pose challenges for implementing security measures such as encryption and intrusion detection systems. To address this, we propose a comprehensive trust-based framework aimed at enhancing substation security. The framework comprises a trust model, a risk posture model, and a trust transferability model. The trust model detects protocol-based attacks on Intelligent Electronic Devices and SCADA HMI systems, while the risk posture model dynamically assesses the substation’s risk posture. The trust transferability model evaluates the feasibility of transferring and integrating a device and its trust capabilities into a different substation. The practical substation emulation involves a Docker-based testbed, employing a multi-agent architecture with a real-time Security Operations Center-influenced dashboard. Assessment involves testing against attacks guided by the MITRE ICS ATT&CK framework. Our framework displays resilience against diverse attacks, identifies malicious behavior, and rewards trustworthy devices.

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)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.279
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 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

Citations21
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSmart CitiesSame topicSmart Grid Security and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207