ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2026
The Evolving Security of the Internet of Vehicles: A Survey from Classical Machine Learning to Large Language Models, Adversarial Robustness, and Explainable AI.
Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Internet of Vehicles (IoV) connects vehicles, roadside infrastructure, and cloud or edge platforms to support safer and more efficient transportation. This connectivity also exposes vehicular networks to message spoofing, denial-of-service, and man-in-the-middle attacks, and to threats that target the machine-learning defenses themselves, such as model poisoning, gradient inversion, and adversarial examples. Machine learning and deep learning are now the dominant defensive tools, and the resulting literature is large and fragmented. This survey reviews that literature using a documented database search and stated inclusion criteria. The retained studies are organized into three categories, each defined by the dominant security-design problem it addresses. The categories cover classical detection and prevention, decentralized security based on federated learning and blockchain, and the assurance directions of Large Language Model (LLM)-driven detection, adversarial robustness, and explainable artificial intelligence. Rather than pooling reported scores, the survey records the evaluation setting of each study. This shows that de-duplication, class balancing, and metric aggregation account for much of the apparent variation in reported performance. A study-level assessment finds that no reviewed study demonstrates more than one of the three assurance capabilities, and no detector evaluated on vehicular traffic has been tested against adversarial perturbation. The survey concludes with a cross-category comparison, an EU AI Act alignment assessment, and recommendations for future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.