Targeted Adversarial Attacks on Wind Power Forecasts

March 29, 2023 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐Ÿ› Machine-mediated learning

๐Ÿ‘ป CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Renรฉ Heinrich, Christoph Scholz, Stephan Vogt, Malte Lehna arXiv ID 2303.16633 Category cs.LG: Machine Learning Cross-listed cs.CR Citations 23 Venue Machine-mediated learning Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
In recent years, researchers proposed a variety of deep learning models for wind power forecasting. These models predict the wind power generation of wind farms or entire regions more accurately than traditional machine learning algorithms or physical models. However, latest research has shown that deep learning models can often be manipulated by adversarial attacks. Since wind power forecasts are essential for the stability of modern power systems, it is important to protect them from this threat. In this work, we investigate the vulnerability of two different forecasting models to targeted, semi-targeted, and untargeted adversarial attacks. We consider a Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) network for predicting the power generation of individual wind farms and a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) for forecasting the wind power generation throughout Germany. Moreover, we propose the Total Adversarial Robustness Score (TARS), an evaluation metric for quantifying the robustness of regression models to targeted and semi-targeted adversarial attacks. It assesses the impact of attacks on the model's performance, as well as the extent to which the attacker's goal was achieved, by assigning a score between 0 (very vulnerable) and 1 (very robust). In our experiments, the LSTM forecasting model was fairly robust and achieved a TARS value of over 0.78 for all adversarial attacks investigated. The CNN forecasting model only achieved TARS values below 0.10 when trained ordinarily, and was thus very vulnerable. Yet, its robustness could be significantly improved by adversarial training, which always resulted in a TARS above 0.46.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Machine Learning

Died the same way โ€” ๐Ÿ‘ป Ghosted