MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An Overview of Cyber-Physical Security in Electric Vehicle Charging Technologies

2025· article· en· W4413513968 on OpenAlexaff
Samaneh Yazdanipour, Jeonggi Son, Mohammadreza F. M. Arani, Sheldon S. Williamson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRecycling and Waste Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyber-physical systemComputer scienceElectric vehicleComputer securityPhysicsOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) and the development of advanced charging technologies have initiated a new era of smart transportation. However, these advancements also introduce significant cyber-physical security challenges. This paper investigates the cyber-physical security challenges of two pivotal EV charging technologies: Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X), with an emphasis on Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) systems, and wireless charging systems. As these technologies form the backbone of future smart transportation systems, this paper provides an in-depth analysis of their unique vulnerabilities, examines the potential threats from cyber-physical attacks, and studies existing mitigation strategies. By combining research insights, industry standards and real world examples, this paper aims to shed light on cyber-physical security issues. This review emphasizes the importance of cyber-physical security measures to safeguard the safety, dependability and privacy of the evolving intelligent transportation network from threats such as data breaches, unauthorized access, and grid destabilization.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRecycling and Waste Management TechniquesFrench-language works237,207