Aug 2026· Environment Systems and Decisions· Vol 46· 0 citations· 27 references
TL;DR
A hierarchical, CPS-specific structure of resilience domains spanning safety, engineering, organisational, governance and contextual attributes is defined, and a domain-attributed trajectory model is developed that maps each domain to the phase of disturbance it dominantly shapes and to the corresponding NIST cyber resilience goal.
Abstract
Resilience in safety-critical cyber-physical systems is not a settled concept. It carries competing meanings inherited from four distinct intellectual traditions—materials science, ecology, safety engineering and cybersecurity—each with its own definition of what a successful outcome looks like. This tension is not merely academic. It produces operational frameworks in which robustness, adaptability, safety constraint and recovery are treated as equivalent attributes, their structural differences obscured. The result is guidance that can satisfy audit requirements while leaving complex systems vulnerable in ways that compliance-driven requirements cannot detect. This paper addresses that gap in three steps. First, it reconciles the engineering and ecological resilience traditions through the Cyber-Compatibilism principle. Second, it defines a hierarchical, CPS-specific structure of resilience domains spanning safety, engineering, organisational, governance and contextual attributes. Third, it develops a domain-attributed trajectory model that maps each domain to the phase of disturbance it dominantly shapes and to the corresponding NIST cyber resilience goal. No domain operates in isolation: each phase emerges from the combined action of attributes across all domains, with one typically dominant but nonsufficient alone. The model is informed by two industrial case studies and a physical safety-critical testbed representative of those systems; the empirical evidence base is reported in a companion paper.
This survey introduces a cyber attack-driven Sustainability–Resilience (S-R) framework that positions cyber threats as the primary stressor forcing a bilateral trade-off between operational efficiency and continuity in edge-enabled IoT systems.
Nithya Nedungadi, S. Sankaran· Future Internet· 1 citation
A refined hierarchical taxonomy and cross-domain dependency model are introduced to trace how interventions influence outcomes and surface hidden consequence pathways, giving practitioners a clearer basis for prioritising resilience investment, and indicating where current assessment practice and standards could be str...
K. Perrett, I. D. Wilson· Environment Systems and Deci...· 1 citation
The integration of cyber resilience and safety analysis within Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) remains a persistent challenge in defence and safety-critical systems engineering. Fragmented methodologies, tool silos, and the absence of standardised quantitative metrics impede productive, scalable analysis. This p...
Serdar Akar, H. Dogan, Shamal Faily et al.· 2026 IEEE 34th International...· 0 citations
This study examines whether a System Dynamics modelling approach can provide a robust, quantifiable representation of resilience behaviour in the South African National Payment System under continuous cyber disruption and develops and evaluates a multidimensional resilience assessment artefact.
D. Manzini, Rudolph Oosthuizen· International Scientific Con...· 0 citations
The purpose of this paper is to introduce and formalize the Cultural Cyber-Critical Ecosystem (C3E) as a conceptual and operational framework for understanding Cultural Heritage as a cyber-critical domain. This study specifically addresses cyber-cognitive threats, identified as a pressing yet largely underexplored...
Emanuele Bellini, Emiliano Degl'Innocenti· Digital Library Perspectives· 0 citations
Traditional resilience engineering struggles with modern safety–critical systems operating under extreme uncertainty. Antifragility, the ability to gain from systemic stressors and near-misses, remains a philosophical ideal, lacking a rigorous, quantitative framework for engineering. The Systemic Stress–Strain Model (S...
Uriel Hochmann, Yoram Reich· Research in Engineering Desi...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.