Abstract
We develop an empirical electrical-based framework to compare between centrality measures as to judge their ability to predict the vulnerability of smart grids and their elements under various attacks. The centrality measures considered are based on a weighted graph adjacency matrix representing the real power flows. The vulnerability is measured by the post-attack unsatisfied load (UL), which is determined through steady-state simulation using the MatPower v6.0. We introduce a generalized vulnerability curve as a plot of measures of electrical damage (e.g., the UL), versus physical damage. We consider various measures of physical damage such as the Fraction of Elements (FOE) removed and sums of centrality scores of elements removed. The area under the vulnerability curve (denoted as VPM) is shown to be a logical, reliable, and consistent indicator of the predictive power of a centrality measure. The VPM is simulated for several attacks including the Remove Most Central Elements First (RMCEF) attack. We show that degree centrality is the most predictive, when compared to eigenvector and betweenness centralities. Moreover, the degree-based RMCEF attack is the worst among the RMCEF and 5400 random attacks. The FOE-degree centrality VPM is the most predictive as well as the most computationally efficient.