MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391690127 · doi:10.3389/fcomp.2023.1125124

Secure dynamic event-triggering control for consensus under asynchronous denial of service

2024· article· en· W4391690127 on OpenAlexafffund
Amir Amini, Arash Mohammadi, Ming Hou, Amir Asif

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Computer Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityDefence Research and Development CanadaConcordia University
FundersMinistère de la Défense Nationale
KeywordsDenial-of-service attackAsynchronous communicationEvent (particle physics)Computer securityComputer scienceDenialService (business)Computer networkDistributed computingBusinessPsychologyOperating systemThe Internet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction This article proposes a secure implementation for consensus using a dynamic event-triggered control (DETC) scheme for general autonomous multi-agent systems (MAS) under asynchronous (distributed) denial of service (DoS) attacks. The asynchronous DoS attacks can block each communication channel independently in an unknown pattern. Depending on the impact of DoS on the communication topology, the attacks are categorized into (i): connectivity-preserved DoS (CP-DoS), and (ii): connectivity-broken DoS (CB-DoS). In CP-DoS, the operating communication topology remains connected. On the other hand, in CB-DoS the adversary breaks the communication graph into isolated sub-graphs. Methods The DETC scheme is employed to reduce the control updates for each agent. To guarantee consensus under both the CP-DoS and CB-DoS, a linear matrix inequality (LMI) based optimization approach is proposed, which simultaneously designs all the unknown DETC parameters as well as the state feedback control gain. Results The proposed optimization method prioritizes the minimum inter-event interval (MIET) between consecutive control updates. The trade-off between relevant features of the MAS, namely the consensus convergence rate, intensity of control updates, and level of resilience to DoS can be handled by the proposed optimization. Discussion Simulation results quantify the effectiveness of the proposed approach, showcasing its ability to maintain secure consensus in MAS under varying DoS attack scenarios.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Computer ScienceSame topicDistributed Control Multi-Agent SystemsFrench-language works237,207