MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405934657 · doi:10.1109/tsg.2024.3524455

A Probabilistic-Based Approach for Detecting Simultaneous Load Redistribution Attacks Through Entropy Analysis and Deep Learning

2024· article· en· W4405934657 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Khaleghi, Hadis Karimipour

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Smart Grid · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbabilistic logicComputer scienceRedistribution (election)Entropy (arrow of time)Artificial intelligencePrinciple of maximum entropyMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Load redistribution attacks (LRAs) are one of the most sneaky and realistic types of false data injection attacks (FDIAs), in which the attacker manipulates the measurements in a way that depicts a false image of the system situation for the operator. Due to the uncertainty in the system’s parameters, system modeling (AC or DC), and so on, detection LRAs have a lot of challenges. To overcome the difficulty of devising a general mechanism for LRA detection based on deterministic methods, we propose a probabilistic approach based on entropy analysis and deep learning. The ratio of cyber loads to real loads (RCLRLs) is the major input of the proposed detection algorithm to make the presented method applicable for different load levels in the system. By extracting the entropy of RCLRLs under LRAs, our method reduces dependency on system modeling and the system’s parameters. We employ the bias correction method on forecasted loads to approximate the real load in the system, enhancing our approach’s accuracy. The framework is a decentralized algorithm that detects simultaneous LRAs in different areas and ensures scalability for large systems. Simulations on the IEEE 118-bus systems demonstrate the proposed method’s high accuracy and rapid response.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.912

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.234
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Smart GridSame topicSmart Grid Security and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207