On Zero Dynamics and Controllable Cyber-Attacks in Cyber-Physical Systems and Dynamic Coding Schemes as Their Countermeasures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we study stealthy cyber-attacks on actuators of cyber-physical systems (CPS), namely zero dynamics and controllable attacks. In particular, under certain assumptions, we investigate and propose conditions under which one can execute zero dynamics and controllable attacks in the CPS. The above conditions are derived based on the Markov parameters of the CPS and elements of the system observability matrix. Consequently, in addition to outlining the number of required actuators to be attacked, these conditions provide one with the minimum system knowledge needed to perform zero dynamics and controllable cyber-attacks. As a countermeasure against the above stealthy cyber-attacks, we develop a dynamic coding scheme that increases the minimum number of the CPS required actuators to carry out zero dynamics and controllable cyber-attacks to its maximum possible value. It is shown that if at least one secure input channel exists, the proposed dynamic coding scheme can prevent adversaries from executing the zero dynamics and controllable attacks even if they have complete knowledge of the coding system. Finally, two illustrative numerical case studies are provided to demonstrate the effectiveness and capabilities of our derived conditions and proposed methodologies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".