MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Hybrid Deep Learning Approach for DDoS Attacks Detection in EV Charging Stations

2025· article· W7128028059 on OpenAlexaff
Shugofa Hassani, Isaac Woungang, Glaucio H.S. Carvalho, Issa Traoré, Hafiz Yasir Noor

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaBrock UniversityToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeep learningDenial-of-service attackBenchmark (surveying)Intrusion detection systemSoftware deploymentConvolutional neural networkArtificial neural networkMultilayer perceptron

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid deployment of Electric Vehicle (EV) charging station has introduced new cybersecurity challenges, particularly a vulnerability to distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) attacks that can compromise the system’s availability and reliability. This paper proposes a hybrid deep learning-based intrusion detection model (denoted LSTM-GRU-MLP) for detecting DDoS attacks in EV charging stations. The proposed model leverages the temporal sequence learning capabilities of Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) and Gated Recurrent Unit (GRU) networks, combined with the classification strength of a Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP), to capture the sequential and high-dimensional representations from time-series operational data. A comprehensive evaluation is conducted using the CICEV2023 DDoS attack dataset, showing that it achieves $94 \%, 94 \%, 99 \%$ and 97% in terms of accuracy, precision, recall and F1-score, respectively, Compared to our proposed benchmark model Deep Convolutional Neural Network (DCNN), which achieved 88% accuracy, 90% precision, 95% recall, and 92% F1-score. Index Terms-EV Charging Station, Hybrid Deep approach, Long Short-Term Memory, Gated Recurrent Unit Multi-Layer Perceptron(MLP),DDoS attacks and detection, CICEV 2023 datasets.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.234 · 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