2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2020.08.085
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Secure synchronization of stochastic complex networks subject to deception attack with nonidentical nodes and internal disturbance

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…By solving the generalized eigenvalue problem (9), we get đ›Œ = 11.5, 𝜆 max (P) 𝜆 min (P) = 1.1705. According to condition (11) in Theorem 1, one obtains f 2 < 0.0133. Choose the impulsive interval f 1 = f 2 = 0.006.…”
Section: Numerical Examplesmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…By solving the generalized eigenvalue problem (9), we get đ›Œ = 11.5, 𝜆 max (P) 𝜆 min (P) = 1.1705. According to condition (11) in Theorem 1, one obtains f 2 < 0.0133. Choose the impulsive interval f 1 = f 2 = 0.006.…”
Section: Numerical Examplesmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Summarize the aforementioned research results and to our best knowledge, there is rarely research to take advantage of impulsive control method to achieve consensus for MASs against the state‐dependent sensor attacks. Because the sensor attacks are different from the additive deception attacks referred in References 29 and 30, the present design methods of control gain in the impulsive controller can not resist the sensor attacks effectively. Moreover, in the present research results about impulsive consensus control for MASs against deception attack, the dynamics of agents is required to be deterministic.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…In Reference 28, a pinning impulsive controller was researched in which the average impulsive interval and average impulsive gain were introduced. At present, the impulsive control has been utilized to handle a type of additive deception attack in MASs 23,29 or complex networks, 30 in which impulsive control has showed its robustness to additive deception attacks by reducing the influence of false signal on systems 23 . Similarly, Reference 28 introduced a type of deception attack which can destroy the connected network topology between agents in the impulsive control.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In recent years, as a characteristic collective behavior of complex networks, the synchronization problem of complex networks has received more and more attention from different fields because of its outstanding potential applications and outstanding achievements in nature, social, and technological fields [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ]. The complexity of the system can be expressed by entropy.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%