MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Real-time Monitoring Architecture for Enhanced Cybersecurity in the EV Ecosystem

2024· article· en· W4408281781 on OpenAlexaff
Rinith Reghunath, M. A. Sayed, K. Sarieddine, R. Atallah, Danial Jafarigiv, Marthe Kassouf, Chadi Assi, Mohsen Ghafouri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed systems and fault tolerance
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArchitectureComputer scienceEcosystemComputer securityEmbedded systemReal-time computingEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electric Vehicles (EV) have experienced a tremendous rise in popularity as they offer a sustainable alternative to conventional vehicles. However, the EV ecosystem is a complex system consisting of many interconnected components such as the EV Charging Station (CS) and the EV Charging Station Management System (CSMS). Given its connection to the smart grid and its direct impact on the transportation sector, securing the EV ecosystem is essential and requires the design of novel monitoring solutions. Previous studies proposed single-component detection mechanisms that cannot detect all potential anomalies across the system. Our work addresses this issue through the combination and correlation of monitoring data collected from the different EV ecosystem components. Our objective is to develop a real-time monitoring platform for attack detection in the public EV charging ecosystem that is based on the extension of the IEC 62351-7:2017 Network and System Management (NSM) standard. By adopting an international security standard, we ensure the monitoring platform is compatible with international power systems. To validate the utility of the approach, we integrate the monitoring framework with a real-time EV charging cosimulation testbed and discuss how it can be used to detect EV-based cyberattacks.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.875
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDistributed systems and fault toleranceFrench-language works237,207