MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cost Parameter Recovery Attack via Exploitation of Real-time Price Signals in Power System

2025· article· W4416286640 on OpenAlexaff
Junfei Wang, Pirathayini Srikantha

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExploitElectric power systemKey (lock)Marginal costFunction (biology)Power (physics)Resource (disambiguation)Lagrange multiplier

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To promote transparency, monitor emissions, and help market participants make more informed decisions in smart grids, Independent System Operators (ISOs) and governmental agencies often publish market data, including prices and power generation levels. For example, the ISO of New England provides a real-time Locational Marginal Price (LMP) map and aggregates power generation data by resource type every five minutes. LMPs—which reflect real-time price signals at different locations in the market—are typically derived as the Lagrange multipliers of the AC Optimal Power Flow (ACOPF) problem, which is solved at regular intervals. As outputs of ACOPF, both power generation levels and LMPs are highly valuable, and are frequently used in research to support fast decision-making processes. Although this information is not inherently sensitive, adversaries may exploit these datasets to infer private details about the power grid, such as generators’ cost functions. In this paper, we demonstrate that adversaries can accurately recover the coefficients of each generator’s cost function by combining two key pieces of publicly available information—power generation levels and LMPs—with a small amount of data from the targeted bus.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSmart Grid Security and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207