MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400489440 · doi:10.1109/tnsm.2024.3423762

Authentication of Smart Grid by Integrating QKD and Blockchain in SCADA Systems

2024· article· en· W4400489440 on OpenAlexaff
Shubhani Aggarwal, Georges Kaddoum

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlockchainSCADASmart gridInternet of ThingsComputer scienceAuthentication (law)GridComputer securityComputer networkEngineeringElectrical engineeringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information and Communication Technology (ICT) provides customers with utilities and smart grid solutions, enabling enhanced monitoring and control of energy management systems. This technology is poised to elevate the reliability, sustainability, and efficiency of future electric grids through the implementation of advanced metering infrastructure (AMI). However, current Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems lack trusted machine authentication in smart grid communications, leaving the electric grid vulnerable to cyberattacks via sophisticated network technologies such as wireless access points, sensors, routers, and gateways. Therefore, ensuring proper management of data integrity from field sensors is crucial to enhance the reliability of SCADA systems. In this context, the utilization of quantum key distribution (QKD) key pairs is proposed to uphold integrity in smart grid communications. This paper presents a fibre optic blockchain network designed to manage and utilize cryptographic keys, facilitating the authentication of peer-to-peer (P2P) communications in SCADA systems. This demonstration underscores the feasibility of employing QKD and blockchain to further strengthen the integrity and authentication of smart grid communications. Additionally, this paper delves into discussing the performance metrics and overhead expenses of the proposed scheme in comparison with existing state-of-the-art proposals. Simulation results highlight the significant impact of blockchain size on the system setup’s throughput and latency.

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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Network and Service ManagementSame topicSmart Grid Security and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207