SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2607.06632

Does Demand Response Increase Vulnerability to Cyber Attacks by Adversarial Data Modifications?

Abstract

Adversarial attacks are crafted data manipulations that aim to deteriorate the outcomes of prediction or decision-making algorithms. In the energy systems literature, adversarial attacks have been studied with a focus on problems regarding the electricity grid. Such problems include forecasting and grid state estimation, where adversarial attacks are also known as false data injection attacks. Only few studies have analyzed the potential impact that adversarial attacks have on the demand side. We analyze how manipulated price forecasts impact the decision-making in industrial demand response. To this end, we design adversarial attacks that aim to deteriorate the output of electricity price forecasting models and solve scheduling optimization problems of energy-intensive production processes using the distorted price forecasts. We make use of a generalized process model to investigate the vulnerability to adversarial attacks for a range of production scheduling problems with different levels of process flexibility. We find that adversarial attacks can erode the profits gained from demand response. However, when perturbations are limited in extent (so that they are hard to detect by the human user), demand response preserves about 90\% of its financial advantage compared to steady-state process operation. Further, we find that the impact of adversarial attacks on demand response does not only depend on the magnitude of the perturbations but rather on the orientation of the adversarial perturbations. Therefore, we argue that attack analyses should explicitly incorporate the sensitivities of scheduling optimization models into the attack design to enable more rigorous assessments of decision-making under adversarial attacks.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Clemens Kortmann, Eike Cramer. 2026-07-07. Does Demand Response Increase Vulnerability to Cyber Attacks by Adversarial Data Modifications?. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.06632

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

AUC Maximization from Biased Positive-unlabeled Data with Confidence

Maximizing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) is a standard approach to imbalanced binary classification. Although positive and negative data are required for maximizing the AUC, negative data are often difficult to collect in some real-world applications due to privacy concerns or the need for specialized expertise to annotate them. Thus, AUC maximization from positive and unlabeled (PU) data has been attracting attention. Existing methods assume that labeled positive data are unbiased samples from the true positive distribution. However, this ideal assumption is often violated in practice. In this paper, we propose a method to maximize the AUC from biased PU data. To address the bias, our key idea is to exploit {\it confidence}, i.e., the probability that an instance is positive, associated with the small number of labeled positive data. We derive an estimator of the AUC risk using biased PU data with confidence, enabling AUC maximization under such bias. We further show that the rewritten AUC risk induces a Bayes-optimal AUC ranking even when the available confidence is any strictly increasing transformation of the true posterior probability. We experimentally show the effectiveness of our method on eight real-world datasets.

cs.LG

Measuring the Value of World-Model Updates: A Counterfactual Utility Protocol for Continual Adaptation

Continual world models must decide whether new data justify changing the model. Fixed replay schedules and prediction-error triggers specify when to update, but neither reveals the value of an individual update: one deployment run cannot show how the same model would have performed at that moment had it held its parameters. We introduce the fork ledger, which branches a deployment stream at pre-registered decision points into matched update and hold continuations under common random numbers. It evaluates both continuations on the same episodes and records $\Delta R = R_{\mathrm{update}} - R_{\mathrm{hold}}$. Always applying one fixed update mechanism lowers return on all three simulated control tasks: CartPole ($-144.0$; checkpoint-bootstrap $95\%$ CI $[-185.4,-116.1]$, against a converged return near $650$), Walker ($-82.8$; $[-101.1,-61.7]$) and Cheetah ($-18.6$; $[-29.0,-6.6]$). Divergence is an outcome of applying the update, so the estimand counts every attempted fork; restricted to the $693$ of $720$ that did not collapse, CartPole and Walker are unchanged in sign ($-113.4$ and $-82.1$) and Cheetah becomes unresolved ($-3.9$; $[-17.5,+13.0]$). The task is the unit of inference: each contributes $240$ attempted forks over five pretrained checkpoints crossed with two drift directions. The ledger makes counterfactual utility observable for a fixed mechanism, allowing triggers to be judged by the updates they select rather than by surprise detection alone.

cs.LG

When More Is Not Better: Component Anti-Synergy in a P300 Speller

P300 brain-computer interface (BCI) spellers can provide hands-free communication for people with severe motor impairments. Modern pipelines combine multiple individually promising components, often assuming that 'more-is-better'. We tested this assumption using a four-component full-factorial experiment varying the inclusion of Euclidean Alignment (EA), xDAWN spatial filtering, subject calibration, and language model priors on a public P300 dataset. Performance was evaluated using accuracy, repetitions, and information transfer rate (ITR) with mixed-effects models. Results show that the value of components is conditional rather than additive. Calibration was the strongest singular contributor, while EA compensated for its absence in zero-calibration settings. Adding independently useful components could also reduce performance, revealing component anti-synergy. Contrary to conventional wisdom, LM support was not universally beneficial: its effect depends strongly on the strength of the underlying EEG pipeline, while results from a larger LM showed a similar pattern. Together, these findings challenge maximal 'all-on' pipeline design and highlight the value of selecting spatial and language-support components according to the quality of available EEG evidence.

cs.LG