With the growing demand for electricity, the penetration of Renewable Distributed Generators (RDGs), alongside the transition from Internal Combustion Engine Vehicles (ICEVs) to Electric Vehicles (EVs), has become a pressing challenge for the stable and efficient operation of distribution networks. This research focuses on a critical task of determining the optimal integration of RDGs, including solar photovoltaic systems, wind turbines, biomass units, and EV charging stations, into an Unbalanced Radial Distribution System (URDS). This work proposes an optimization approach aiming to minimise the total costs (TCs), active power losses (APLs), voltage unbalance factor (VUF), and voltage deviation (VD) of the network under consideration simultaneously. The integration of RDGs is carried out using a metaheuristic technique, which accounts for the intermittent nature of renewable energy sources, the stochastic behaviour of EVs, and the variability of load demands over 24 h a day. Fuzzy decision-making is applied to select an optimal trade-off solution from the Pareto front. The effectiveness of the developed approach is assessed comprehensively on a Pakistani 60-bus URDS as a primary study, while the IEEE-123 bus system is employed as a validation case to demonstrate the applicability and scalability of the proposed methodology. Among the five analysed case studies, the simulation results indicate that coordinated integration of RDGs and EVCSs into the system yields significant benefits, including a decreased reliance on conventional centralised generation, with a reduction of 56.29% in costs, 46.61% in losses, 7.17% in voltage unbalance, and 27.13% in voltage deviation as compared to the base case.
Maaz Ahmad, M. I. Mohmand, Aamir Nawaz et al.· World Electric Vehicle Journ...· 0 citations
Cross-chain bridges represent one of the most damaging attack surfaces in decentralized finance, with major exploits (e.g., Ronin, Wormhole, Nomad, Multichain) arising not from broken signature schemes but from failures in proof verification, replay protection, and signer-set management, gaps that conventional threshold-signature multisignature wallets do not address. This study presents an incident-aware multisignature architecture combining three on-chain predicates—block-height freshness windows, epoch-bound signer sets, and Merkle inclusion-proof verification—with a non-authoritative off-chain LightGBM classifier that generates SHAP-attributed risk explanations to support governance actions such as pausing, vetoing, or rotating signers, without directly blocking or approving execution. The framework was evaluated on a simulated benchmark of 78,600 Ethereum testnet transactions containing six injected anomaly classes (gas spikes, nonce jitter, malformed call data, stale intents, proof-delivery delays, and epoch-rotation replays). The LightGBM advisor achieved ROC-AUC 0.92 (95% CI [0.906, 0.926]) and F1 0.73 ([0.712, 0.749]), outperforming five baselines—logistic regression, Random Forest, XGBoost, isolation forest, and a rule-based detector—with the highest F1 (0.731) and PR-AUC (0.799), while the rule-based detector, which by construction covers only the anomaly classes addressed by the deterministic predicates, attained F1 0.282. Differences were statistically significant except for the LightGBM–XGBoost PR-AUC comparison. The deterministic layer itself is verified through 28 property-level contract tests covering all seven modeled attack objectives, with measured per-function gas costs (execute_Intent: 118,756 gas, of which 28,432 gas is Merkle-proof verification). Within this controlled setting, the results indicate that a machine learning advisor can extend anomaly-prioritization coverage beyond the scope of the deterministic predicates while leaving execution control fully deterministic. This work is presented as a controlled proof of concept: the reported metrics quantify recovery of scripted injection patterns, and validation against real-world exploit traces remains future work.
Usman Mohy-ud-Din Chaudhary, Humaira Arshad, M. I. Mohmand et al.· Computers· 0 citations
Context: The Agile methodology has been prevalent in the software industry for more than two decades, marking a shift from plan-driven to market-driven approaches and introducing various challenges. While the literature identifies numerous challenges in Agile development, little attention has been given to their ranking and prioritization, which are critical for effective project management and decision making. This study fills this gap by combining empirical evidence from the literature and practitioners. Objectives: This study aims to identify and hierarchically prioritize the most recent challenges faced by Agile practitioners during product development. To achieve this, a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) was conducted using 115 published studies between 2010 and 2025 followed by empirical data collection from 30 Agile experts through semi-structured interviews conducted with practitioners from Agile companies and an online survey. This study applies Cumulative Voting (100-Dollar Test) and Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) techniques to rank and prioritize these challenges. Results: The SLR identifies several recurring Agile challenges; however, limited research has focused on their ranking and prioritization. The present study reveals new challenges, such as user interface complexities, lack of pre-development and pre-operational cost information, and lack of cost scalability at the module and feature levels. The current study identifies Inadequate Architecture (22%), Lack of Standardized Framework (18%), Communication and Coordination (16%), Poor Requirement Verification (13%), and Minimum Documentation (8%) as the most significant challenges. Conclusions: This study provides valuable insight for Agile practitioners and organizations, enabling more informed project planning, resource allocation, and strategic decision making. By focusing on the most critical challenges, teams can enhance software quality, streamline processes, and improve overall productivity in Agile environments.
Kamran Khan Tatari, Shahid Latif, Salim Ur Rehman et al.· Information· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
