MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416975561 · doi:10.1049/cps2.70035

An Early Stage Failure Prediction Mechanism in Smart Grid Networks

2025· article· en· W4416975561 on OpenAlex
Ali Salehpour, Irfan Al‐Anbagi, Kin‐Choong Yow, Xiaolin Cheng

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Cyber-Physical Systems Theory & Applications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersMitacs
KeywordsSmart gridComponent (thermodynamics)Cascading failureMechanism (biology)Electric power systemBoosting (machine learning)Construct (python library)GridPower grid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Smart grid systems, as modern cyber‐physical systems (CPS), introduce new interdependencies between power and communication components that can create new security challenges. One potential challenge that may arise is cascading failures resulting from cyber‐attacks or the failure of a component that needs to be detected in a timely manner. In this paper, we propose a novel early‐stage failure prediction (ESFP) mechanism that applies machine learning (ML) algorithms to enhance the security of smart grid systems. We use a realistic model to generate a dataset for training ML algorithms and develop a mechanism to predict the state of a system's components in the early stages before failures propagate in the system. ESFP can predict the final state of each power system component with respect to its initial failures. We apply the extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost) algorithm and examine the features of both the communication and power networks that provide high accuracy in predicting failures. We develop a new data generation procedure to construct a dataset containing electrical and network features and characteristics for training ML algorithms. ESFP also identifies the location of the initial failures as this allows for further protection plans and decisions. We evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed mechanism through an analysis conducted on an IEEE 118‐bus system. The proposed mechanism achieves 99.4% prediction accuracy in random attacks using the XGBoost algorithm. We also improve the time of the XGBoost algorithm by 75% by combining an unsupervised ML algorithm with this algorithm.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score0.866

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.208 · 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