MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Linear-Dynamic Predictor Based Defense Against Current Drainage Cyber Attack of BLDC Motor Control System

2024· preprint· en· W4396859756 on OpenAlexaff
Yuri Boiko, Iluju Kiringa, Tet Yeap

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurrent (fluid)Control (management)DrainageCyber-attackComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Computer securityEngineeringElectrical engineeringArtificial intelligenceBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using modeling and simulation tools, we have demonstrated that the basic predictor module, which utilizes linear-dynamic predicting algorithms, has the potential to offer defense against bias injection type of cyber-attacks targeted at closed-loop-controlled systems, such as Kalman filter-driven brushless DC (BLDC) motors. Specifically verified is scenario of introduced earlier current drainage attack with full transparency for the defender, whose activity is shown to be able to counteract the manipulation game from the attacker. The attacker manipulation with distortion coefficient modifying angular speed estimates is shown to trigger significant growth of operating motor currents with accumulating effect on increasing speed of the rotor. Moreover, an abrupt termination of the attack is shown to result in even stronger currents increase in the forced braking process, creating potentially more damaging circuits overloads (to be called "attack withdrawal syndrome"). The defender is shown to be able to defeat the attacker within an asymmetric Stackelberg game relying on linear-dynamic predictor to preemptively compensate the distortion of the angular speed estimates. Demonstrated is potential for the defender to effectively negate the current drainage attack itself as well as its immediate consequence, such as attack withdrawal syndrome. Out of the reach for the defender remains the attack initiation impulse, whose damaging impact needs to be limited via dedicated algorithm with separate anomaly detector.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSmart Grid Security and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207