MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Kolmogorov-Arnold Network for Explainable Detection of Cyberattacks on EV Chargers

2025· article· W4416136372 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmad Mohammad Saber, Max Mauro Dias Santos, Mohammad Al Janaideh, Amr Youssef, Deepa Kundur

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKey (lock)Work (physics)Electric vehiclePower (physics)Power consumptionFeature extractionElectric power

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing adoption of Electric Vehicles (EVs) and the expansion of charging infrastructure and their reliance on communication expose Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment (EVSE) to cyberattacks. This paper presents a novel Kolmogorov-Arnold Network (KAN)-based framework for detecting cyberattacks on EV chargers using only power consumption measurements. Leveraging the KAN’s capability to model nonlinear, high-dimensional functions and its inherently interpretable architecture, the framework effectively differentiates between normal and malicious charging scenarios. The model is trained offline on a comprehensive dataset containing over 100,000 cyberattack cases generated through an experimental setup. Once trained, the KAN model can be deployed within individual chargers for real-time detection of abnormal charging behaviors indicative of cyberattacks. Our results demonstrate that the proposed KAN-based approach can accurately detect cyberattacks on EV chargers with Precision and F1-score of 99% and 92%, respectively, outperforming existing detection methods. Additionally, the proposed KANs’s enable the extraction of mathematical formulas representing KAN’s detection decisions, addressing interpretability, a key challenge in deep learning-based cyber-security frameworks. This work marks a significant step toward building secure and explainable EV charging infrastructure.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.726
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.209 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207