A method for evaluating the resilience of power grid enterprise security management

Abstract

The present invention discloses a method for evaluating the resilience of security management of power grid enterprises, including S101 constructing a power grid security management system, S102 constructing a security resilience evaluation index system, S103 constructing a matter-element matrix, S104 determining the weight of each indicator, S105 determining the classical domain and node domain matter-element, S106 correlation function and correlation calculation, S107 comprehensive correlation calculation, S108 determining the level of the matter-element to be evaluated, and obtaining a security resilience evaluation result.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the field of safety management system assessment, and in particular to a method for assessing the safety management resilience of a power grid enterprise. Background Art

[0002] As one of the most complex and dangerous infrastructures in the world, the power grid (consisting of a large number of power plants, transmission and distribution lines / equipment) is extremely complex. Any slight negligence may lead to serious accident consequences, affecting the normal work and life of thousands of people, and even causing serious injuries or death. In recent years, with the development trend of digitalization and intelligence of China's power grid, and the large-scale access of new energy, new challenges have been brought to the safety management of the power grid. Among them, the uncertainty on the power consumption side caused by the change of power load, as well as the widespread application of distributed power sources, energy storage systems, and microgrids, have increased the difficulty of demand-side safety management. Based on the current status of safety management of power grid enterprises and the new requirements for safety management in the process of developing new businesses and new formats, a safety management system and capacity assessment method for power grid enterprises is established.

[0003] At present, in terms of safety management system, through a lot of research and analysis on safety science theory and safety management system, the existing enterprise safety management system is mostly constructed with PDCA cycle method, intrinsic safety theory, Bode theory, and LEC evaluation method, but the safety management of most enterprises is still process safety management. Such enterprises often have insufficient risk control capabilities and cannot respond to emergencies. Power grid enterprises often have accidents in their daily operations. The reason is that on the one hand, the construction of the safety management system lacks integrity, and on the other hand, there is a lack of effective self-evaluation methods for the safety management system. It is impossible to clarify the current status of the safety management system, and no reasonable evaluation method has been found to improve the company's own safety management defects and loopholes. The safety management system constructed by the STAMP model is closely linked to the risk identification process, and has the advantages of adjusting and optimizing the existing safety management system.

[0004] At present, in terms of evaluation methods. When the safety management system is established, a reasonable evaluation method is needed to evaluate it and obtain the evaluation results to provide guidance for decision makers to improve their subsequent work. There are mainly maturity model theory, LEC evaluation method, etc. to evaluate enterprise safety management. However, the existing evaluation methods are mostly based on daily production, and cannot evaluate the emergency response capabilities of the safety management system when the enterprise's production safety is impacted. As an inherent ability of the system, resilience is essentially to emphasize the system's ability to absorb, adapt, recover and improve external interference, and has attributes such as situational awareness, resistance, robustness, resilience, recovery, timeliness, and learning ability. Although there have been many studies on the construction of power grid safety management systems, previous studies have mainly stayed on normalized accident response and theoretical analysis, and there are few theoretical and empirical analyses of what power grid companies should do in emergencies, which is not conducive to the safety management of the power grid. For power grid companies, enhancing the overall ability to resist risk shocks and the ability to recover and optimize after shocks through resilience theory is an important part of the safety management level of the power grid system.

[0005] In summary, there is an urgent need to build a modern security management resilience assessment method. Summary of the invention

[0006] In order to solve the above technical problems existing in the prior art, the purpose of the present invention is to provide a method for evaluating the security management resilience of a power grid enterprise. The specific technical solution is as follows:

[0007] A method for evaluating the security management resilience of a power grid enterprise, characterized by comprising the following steps:

[0008] S101 builds a power grid security management system;

[0009] S102 builds a security resilience evaluation index system;

[0010] S103 constructs matter-element matrix;

[0011] S104 determines the weight of each indicator;

[0012] S105 determines the classical domain and the node domain matter-element;

[0013] S106 correlation function and correlation calculation;

[0014] S107 comprehensive correlation calculation;

[0015] S108 determines the level of the object-element to be evaluated and obtains the safety resilience evaluation result.

[0016] Furthermore, the power grid security management system in step S101 includes three basic structures: security constraints, hierarchical security control structure and process model.

[0017] Furthermore, the hierarchical safety control structure includes two levels: a control layer and a constraint layer; the control layer is a government regulatory agency and a power grid company; the constraint layer corresponds to four indicators: safety assurance, safety supervision, safety guarantee, and safety responsibility.

[0018] Furthermore, the process model implements safety constraints on each controller in the hierarchical safety control structure, and the actuator performs control actions through the downstream; the sensor measures the controlled process and gives feedback through the upstream to complete a controlled process. When the controller receives the upstream information and sends an offline command, a process model is required to handle the entire process; based on the results of the system analysis, a modern safety management system for power grid enterprises is constructed, in which safety constraints correspond to four guidelines, namely: safety policy, safety goals, safety theory, and safety culture; the hierarchical safety management and control structure corresponds to the safety organization system and the system of rules and regulations; the process model corresponds to the safety work system.

[0019] Furthermore, the safety organization system, safety work system, and rules and regulations system are quantified into a safety performance index, a safety management index, a rules and regulations execution index, and a scientific and technological innovation index, thereby constructing a safety management system characterization indicator.

[0020] Furthermore, the resilience factors in step S102 include stability, redundancy, efficiency, and adaptability; the safety management system characterization indicators are mapped to the resilience factors to form a safety resilience evaluation indicator system.

[0021] Furthermore, the matter-element matrix of step S103 includes the safety management status N, the safety management resilience evaluation index C and the characteristic value X, denoted by R=(N, C, X); there are multiple evaluation indicators in the company's safety management resilience evaluation index system, denoted as n characteristics, and the corresponding matter-element matrix can be expressed as:

[0022]

[0023] Furthermore, the S104 determines the weight of each indicator, including determining the analysis object, constructing a judgment matrix A and determining its eigenvector, calculating the random consistency ratio of the matrix, and performing a consistency test; determining the analysis object to be "enterprise safety management system"; constructing a judgment matrix A of the four resilience elements in the indicator, and then using an expert scoring method to determine the weight of each indicator.

[0024] Furthermore, determining the classical domain and node domain matter-elements in S105 includes dividing the enterprise safety management modernization level by referring to the safety risk classification principle, determining the classical domain, and determining the node domain.

[0025] Furthermore, the S108 includes determining the level of security management capability, introducing a correlation calculation method for next-level indicators based on previous-level evaluation indicators, determining the security resilience level of each second-level evaluation indicator, calculating the correlation value of each security resilience level respectively, and determining the overall security resilience level. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0026] Figure 1 It is a flow chart of the method for evaluating the resilience of power grid enterprise security management of the present invention;

[0027] Figure 2 It is the diagram of the dynamics model of the STAMP system;

[0028] Figure 3 It is a hierarchical structure diagram of safety management and control of power grid enterprises;

[0029] Figure 4 It is a flow chart for the implementation of the safety management system model;

[0030] Figure 5 It is a model diagram of the safety management process of power grid enterprises;

[0031] Figure 6 It is a framework diagram of a modern safety management system based on the STAMP model;

[0032] Figure 7 It is a schematic diagram of the relationship between various factors. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0033] The present invention will be further described below in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.

[0034] like Figure 1 As shown, the present invention provides a method for evaluating the resilience of security management of power grid enterprises, including S101 constructing a power grid security management system, S102 constructing a security resilience evaluation index system, S103 constructing a material element matrix, S104 determining the weight of each indicator, S105 determining the classical domain and node domain material elements, S106 correlation function and correlation calculation, S107 comprehensive correlation calculation, S108 determining the level of the material element to be evaluated, and obtaining a security resilience evaluation result.

[0035] like Figure 2 As shown, the power grid security management system constructed in S101 is based on the STAMP principle, including three basic structures: security constraints, hierarchical security control structure and process model; each layer of the hierarchical security control structure imposes constraints on the lower layer, that is, the constraints of the higher layer control the behavior of the lower layer. The control structure has different forms according to different systems.

[0036] The hierarchical structure of power grid enterprise security management and control is as follows: Figure 3As shown in Figure 1, the hierarchical safety control structure includes two levels: control layer and constraint layer. The control layer is the government regulatory agency and power grid companies; the constraint layer corresponds to four indicators: safety assurance, safety supervision, safety guarantee, and safety responsibility. The STAMP model builds a safety management system process as shown in Figure 1. Figure 4 The management system construction process includes 6 levels. The safety management process model is as follows: Figure 5 As shown. The process model is to implement safety constraints on each controller in the hierarchical safety control structure in STAMP, and the actuator makes control actions through the downlink. The sensor measures the controlled process and gives feedback through the uplink to complete a controlled process. When the controller receives the uplink information and issues the offline command, a process model is needed to process the entire process. According to the results of the system analysis, a modern safety management system for power grid enterprises is constructed, including four guidelines, three systems, and the system framework is as follows: Figure 6 According to the management system and the actual situation of the power grid enterprise, the safety management system characterization indicators are determined.

[0037] In the S102 construction of a safety resilience evaluation index system, resilience indicators include stability, redundancy, efficiency, and adaptability; considering the impact of external shocks on the safety management system, the indicators are mapped to resilience indicators to form a safety resilience evaluation index system.

[0038] The S103 constructs the matter-element matrix including the safety management status N, the safety management resilience evaluation index C and the characteristic value X, denoted by R = (N, C, X). There are multiple evaluation indicators in the company's safety management resilience evaluation index system, denoted as n characteristics, and the corresponding matter-element matrix can be expressed as:

[0039]

[0040] The S104 step of determining the weight of each indicator includes determining the analysis object, constructing a judgment matrix A and determining its eigenvector, calculating the random consistency ratio of the matrix, and performing a consistency test. Determining the analysis object The analysis object is determined to be "enterprise safety management system"; constructing a judgment matrix A of the four resilience elements in the indicator, and then using the expert scoring method to determine the weight of each indicator.

[0041] A=(a ij ) mn #(2)

[0042] Where: a ij It is the comparison result of experts on indicator factors i and j.

[0043] Take the row product of the judgment matrix A and then find the root to get the vector V;

[0044]

[0045] Normalize the vector V = [v1, v2, ..., vm]T to obtain the eigenvector W of the judgment matrix A:

[0046]

[0047] Calculate the maximum eigenvalue λ of the judgment matrix A max ;

[0048]

[0049] Where: (AW)i is the i-th element of vector AW.

[0050] Calculate the consistency index CI of the judgment matrix A;

[0051]

[0052] Calculate the random consistency ratio CR and judge the consistency of matrix A. The values ​​of RI are shown in the following table.

[0053] Table 1 Average random consistency index table

[0054]

[0055]

[0056] If the ratio of the consistency index CI to the average random consistency index RI is less than 0.1, the consistency test is satisfied.

[0057] The S105 determination of the classical domain and the node domain matter-element includes dividing the enterprise safety management modernization level by referring to the safety risk classification principle, determining the classical domain, and determining the node domain. Referring to the safety risk classification principle, the enterprise safety management modernization level is divided into 5 levels, denoted as N j (j=1, 2, ..., 5), X ji =[a ji , b ji ]; the classical domain is N about C j The value range of the classical domain matter element matrix is ​​denoted by R j , R j It is the j-th evaluation level of management resilience of the classified power grid enterprises.

[0058] Establish a system composed of various indicators "c i The resilience evaluation index system is constructed, with U = {u1, u2, u3, u4} representing the enterprise security resilience level domain, as shown in Table 2.

[0059] Table 2 Enterprise resilience level

[0060]

[0061]

[0062] Note: The quantitative range of the evaluation indicators needs to be determined based on the actual situation of the enterprise to be evaluated, and parameter symbols are used here as a substitute.

[0063] ① Determine the classical domain:

[0064] Let R g is the classical domain of matter-element R, that is:

[0065]

[0066] Where: Ug is the security level g in the enterprise security resilience level domain U (g = 1, 2, ..., l); V g The evaluation index set C is about the security resilience level U g The value range of a gi , b gi They are index c i The lower and upper limits of the g safety toughness level.

[0067] ②Determine the section area:

[0068] Let R u is the section domain of matter-element R, that is:

[0069]

[0070] Where: V u is the value range of the evaluation index set C with respect to the toughness grade domain U; ​​a ui , b ui Respectively represent the index c i At the lower and upper limits of all toughness grades.

[0071] ③ Determine the evaluation element:

[0072] R i is the matter-element to be evaluated of matter-element R, that is:

[0073]

[0074] Where: c i is the i-th primary indicator to be evaluated for the enterprise resilience level; C i ={c i1 ,c i2 ,…,c in} is c i The secondary evaluation index set, where c ij c i The jth secondary evaluation index of ij For experts ij The evaluation value of vi For experts i A collection of evaluation values ​​assigned to each secondary evaluation indicator.

[0075] The S106 correlation function and correlation calculation, the correlation function K j (X i ) represents the degree to which the object element conforms to the required value range and is calculated using the following formula.

[0076]

[0077] The S107 comprehensive correlation degree is calculated using the following formula:

[0078]

[0079] The S108 determines the level of the object element to be evaluated and obtains the safety resilience assessment result; determining the level of the object element to be evaluated and obtaining the safety resilience assessment result includes judging the level of safety management capability, introducing the correlation calculation method of the next level indicator according to the previous level evaluation indicator, determining the safety resilience level of each second level evaluation indicator, calculating the correlation value of each safety resilience level respectively, and determining the overall safety resilience level.

[0080] Example

[0081] The method specifically includes:

[0082] S101: Build a safety management system for a power grid enterprise.

[0083] Based on the problems exposed in the safety management of power grid enterprises and the new risks brought by new businesses and new formats, and by investigating the current status of safety management systems at home and abroad, a safety management system and characterization indicators were constructed, including the following steps:

[0084] By establishing a hierarchical safety control structure and process model for power grid enterprises, identifying safety constraints and inappropriate control behaviors at each level within the control structure, determining possible control defects, identifying safety risks in production activities, and establishing a safety management system, it is divided into six parts, such as Figure 4 .

[0085] In level 1, the important guiding directions of SMS are clarified through discussions among relevant personnel, and the system goals and constraints are determined on this basis.

[0086] Level 2 introduces the current status of safety management and identifies the relationship between specific safety management goals and implementation paths. Hazard analysis techniques are used to revise the guidance provided in level 1.

[0087] Level 3 constructs the SMS system framework in a graphical way, including the safety organization system, safety work system, and rules and regulations system, and clarifies the relationship between the systems and the contents of the systems.

[0088] Levels 4 and 5 refine the SMS system framework, propose system characterization technology, and decompose the indicators corresponding to the three systems.

[0089] Level 6 defines the system effectiveness evaluation index system and evaluation method, and proposes the system operation and governance capacity modernization evaluation index system and evaluation method.

[0090] 1. Clarify the safety constraints of power grid companies

[0091] For example, the safety constraints of power grid enterprises correspond to four guidelines, namely: safety policy, safety goals, safety theory, and safety culture.

[0092] 2. Layered security control structure

[0093] For example, Figure 3 The hierarchical structure of power grid enterprise safety management and control is shown in the figure. The system has a hierarchical control structure, and each layer imposes constraints on the lower layer, that is, the constraints of the higher layer control the behavior of the lower layer. The control layer is the government regulatory agency and the power grid enterprise head office; the constraint layer includes the power grid enterprise, the production safety committee, the safety supervision department, and the production department, corresponding to the four indicators of safety assurance, safety supervision, safety guarantee, and safety responsibility.

[0094] 3. Process Model

[0095] For example, Figure 5 As shown in the figure, the production process of power grid enterprises includes four links: power generation, transmission and transformation, distribution and consumption. Safety management includes pre-event prevention, in-event control, post-event disposal and rectification and improvement. Pre-event prevention includes risk classification control, hidden danger investigation and treatment and emergency plan; in-event control includes prevention and emergency preparation, monitoring and early warning, emergency disposal and rescue, and effectiveness of emergency preparation; post-event disposal includes event reporting, accident investigation, and accident classification statistics; rectification and improvement includes dynamic identification and evaluation, updating of control measures, continuous tracking and monitoring, and safety production inspection. Under the influence of external shocks, the upper constraint layer is the command and decision-making layer to monitor the process of the event and propose control measures to control the accident.

[0096] 4. Safety management system framework

[0097] According to the results of system analysis, a modern safety management system for power grid enterprises has been established, which is guided by safety policy, safety goal, safety culture, and safety theory, and mainly consists of safety organization system, safety work system, and rules and regulations system. Figure 6 A framework for a modern safety management system.

[0098] Among them, safety constraints correspond to four guidelines, namely: safety policy, safety goals, safety theory, and safety culture.

[0099] The hierarchical security control structure corresponds to the security organization system and the rules and regulations system;

[0100] The process model corresponds to the safe work system.

[0101] The safety organization system, safety work system, and rules and regulations system are constrained and interact with each other through the process model.

[0102] 5. Safety management system characterization indicators

[0103] For example, as shown in Table 3, the safety organization system, safety work system, and rules and regulations system are quantified into safety performance index, safety management index, and rules and regulations execution index, and the scientific and technological innovation index is added to construct a safety management system representation indicator.

[0104] Among them, the safety performance index includes: organizational completeness index, team autonomous safety management index, "safety code" usage rate index, emergency capacity building assessment index, and emergency command center construction index.

[0105] Among them, the safety management index includes: safety supervision work execution rate index, two-measure plan completion rate index, outsourcing team confidence evaluation index, customer-side problem rectification index, safety incident evaluation index, hidden danger remediation index, process control intelligence index, rectification and improvement index, safety investment in place index, safety data paperless utilization rate index, special drill coverage index, emergency personnel training index, emergency equipment configuration index, employee education and training pass rate index, and risk assessment index.

[0106] Among them, the rules and regulations execution index includes: responsibility matching index, rules and regulations completeness index, equipment and operation risk control index, safety routine work execution rate index, and rules and regulations / procedures standard adaptability index.

[0107] Among them, the science and technology innovation index settings include: numerical indicators of safety management, indicators of the level of construction of safety information platform, intelligent indicators of process control, and indicators of safety science and technology innovation and application.

[0108] Table 3 Safety management system characterization indicators

[0109]

[0110]

[0111] S102: Constructing a security resilience evaluation index system

[0112] For example, the 15 secondary indicators are mapped to the four resilience factors of stability, redundancy, efficiency, and adaptability. Figure 7 The indicators shown are related to the four elements of safety organization system, safety work system, rules and regulations system and resilience.

[0113] The four security resilience factors are used as the first-level indicators for enterprise security resilience assessment, and the indicators are further refined into 25 resilience evaluation indicators, as shown in Table 4.

[0114] Table 4 Refinement of existing safety evaluation indicators

[0115]

[0116]

[0117] Each resilience evaluation index is used as a secondary index and divided according to "stability-redundancy-efficiency-fitness". The division results are as follows: Figure 7 As shown,

[0118] S103: Construct matter-element matrix.

[0119] The safety management status N, the safety management resilience evaluation index C and the characteristic value X together constitute the safety management resilience evaluation matter-element, denoted by R = (N, C, X). There are 25 evaluation indicators in the enterprise safety management resilience evaluation index system, denoted as 25 characteristics, and the corresponding matter-element matrix can be expressed as:

[0120]

[0121] S104: Determine the weight of each indicator.

[0122] This embodiment introduces subjective weights: the 10 invited experts independently compare the first-level indicators in pairs according to the actual situation of their enterprises, and independently construct their judgment matrices to find the weights of the first-level indicators in the security resilience level of their enterprises. Taking expert A as an example, the method is as follows:

[0123] 1) Determine the analysis object as "enterprise safety management system",

[0124] 2) Construct the judgment matrix A and determine its eigenvector;

[0125] The judgment matrix A of the four resilience factors in the index is constructed as shown in formula (2). The judgment matrix A constructed by the expert is:

[0126]

[0127] The judgment matrix A is multiplied row by row and then rooted, as shown in formula (3), and the matrix V is obtained as follows:

[0128] V=[2.3403 1.3161 0.7598 0.4273] T

[0129] The matrix V is normalized as shown in formula (4), and the eigenvector W of the judgment matrix A is obtained as follows:

[0130] W=[0.4832 0.2717 0.1569 0.0882] T

[0131] 3) Calculate the random consistency ratio of the matrix and perform consistency check.

[0132] Calculate the maximum eigenvalue λ of A max , the method is shown in formula (5), and the results are as follows:

[0133]

[0134]

[0135] The consistency index CI of the judgment matrix is ​​calculated as shown in formula (6). The results are as follows:

[0136]

[0137] The random consistency ratio CR is calculated as shown in formula (7), and the result is as follows:

[0138] When m=4, RI is 0.89, then:

[0139]

[0140] Since CR = 0.0547 < 0.1, the judgment matrix A constructed by expert A passes the consistency test.

[0141] Determine the weight of each resilience factor in the index. Since the judgment matrix A constructed by expert A has passed the consistency test, the weighting of the resilience factor is effective. The eigenvector W of the judgment matrix constructed by him is the weight assigned to the resilience factor of the index, that is: w A1 =0.4832,w A2 =0.2717,w A3 =0.1569,w A4 =0.0882.

[0142] Similarly, the eigenvectors of the judgment matrix constructed by each resilience factor in the resilience level of other experts in the expert group can be calculated. Among them, there are 8 experts who passed the consistency test, and the weights assigned to them are arithmetic averaged. The results are shown in Table 5.

[0143] Table 5 Weights and arithmetic mean values ​​of primary indicators

[0144]

[0145] S105: Determine the classical domain and node domain matter-elements.

[0146] First, refer to the safety risk classification principle to divide the company's safety management modernization into 5 levels, denoted as N j (j=1, 2, ..., 5), X ji =[a ji , b ji ] is N about C j The value range is the classical domain, and the classical domain matter element matrix is ​​denoted by R j , R j It is the j-th evaluation level of management resilience of the classified power grid enterprises.

[0147] The established enterprise security resilience level domain U is as follows, which determines the classic domains Ri of each level of the power grid enterprise:

[0148]

[0149]

[0150] Determine the section region Rp as:

[0151]

[0152] Determine the object element R to be evaluated i

[0153] This paper takes the first-level indicator stability c1 as an example and uses formula (10) to determine the object element R1 to be evaluated:

[0154]

[0155] S106: Correlation function and correlation calculation

[0156] (1) Calculation of secondary index correlation

[0157] The second-level evaluation index c in the first-level evaluation index c1 11 Taking the calculation of the correlation of enterprise security resilience level 1 as an example, the calculation method of the correlation of secondary indicators is introduced. From formula (11), we can get:

[0158]

[0159]

[0160]

[0161] By analogy, c can be calculated 11 The correlation of other toughness levels is: K2(c 11 )=-0.320,K3(c 11 )=-0.660,K4(c 11 )=-0.830.

[0162] Similarly, the correlation values ​​of other secondary indicators with respect to each security resilience level can be calculated, and then the correlation values ​​of other secondary indicators with respect to each security resilience level can be calculated. The safety resilience level of each secondary evaluation indicator is determined, see Table 6.

[0163] (2) Calculation of first-level index correlation

[0164] Taking the first-level indicator c1 as an example, the calculation method of the first-level indicator correlation is introduced. The correlation value of each toughness level is determined by formula (11):

[0165] K(c1)=W1K(c 1j )=(w 1j )(k g (c 1j ))=[0.9586 -0.2482 -0.6241 -0.8120]

[0166] Similarly, the correlation values ​​of other first-level indicators with respect to each security resilience level can be calculated as follows:

[0167] K(c2)=[0.3155 -0.1569 -0.5784 -0.7892],

[0168] K(c3)=[0.7417 -0.1893 -0.5947 -0.7973],

[0169] K(c4)=[0.9236 -0.1896 -0.5948 -0.7973].

[0170] By The safety resilience level of each first-level evaluation indicator is determined, see Table 5.

[0171] S107: Comprehensive correlation calculation

[0172] According to formula (12), the comprehensive correlation value of the enterprise's security resilience level for each security resilience level is determined as: K(c) = WK(c i )=(w i )(k g (c i ))=[0.7101 -0.1954 -0.5977 -0.7988]

[0173] S108: Determine the level of the object element to be evaluated

[0174] according to because Therefore, it can be determined that the enterprise’s overall security resilience level is level 1, which means “strong security resilience”.

[0175] Table 6 Basic overview of resilience capabilities of the empirical subjects

[0176]

[0177]

[0178] Obviously, the above embodiments of the present invention are only examples for clearly explaining the present invention, and are not intended to limit the implementation methods of the present invention. It is not necessary and impossible to list all implementation methods exhaustively. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions and improvements made within the spirit and principles of the present invention shall be included in the protection scope of the claims of the present invention.

Claims

1. A method for evaluating the security management resilience of power grid enterprises, characterized in that The following steps are included: S101 builds a power grid security management system, including three basic structures: security constraints, hierarchical security control structure and process model; The process model implements safety constraints on each controller in the hierarchical safety control structure. The actuator performs control actions through downlink. The sensor measures the controlled process and gives feedback through uplink to complete a controlled process. When the controller receives uplink information and issues an offline command, a process model is required to process the entire process. Based on the results of the system analysis, a modern safety management system for power grid enterprises is constructed, in which safety constraints correspond to four guidelines: safety policy, safety goals, safety theory, and safety culture; The hierarchical safety control structure corresponds to the safety organization system and the rules and regulations system; the process model corresponds to the safety work system; The safety organization system, safety work system, and rules and regulations system are quantified into safety performance index, safety management index, rules and regulations execution index, and scientific and technological innovation index, thereby constructing safety management system representation indicators; S102 builds a safety resilience evaluation index system; resilience factors include stability, redundancy, efficiency, and adaptability; the safety management system characterization indicators are mapped to resilience factors to form a safety resilience evaluation index system; S103 constructs a matter-element matrix, which includes the safety management status N, the safety management resilience evaluation index C and the characteristic value X, denoted by R = (N, C, X); there are multiple evaluation indicators in the company's safety management resilience evaluation index system, denoted as n characteristics, and the corresponding matter-element matrix can be expressed as: S104 determines the weight of each indicator, including determining the analysis object, constructing a judgment matrix A and determining its eigenvector, calculating the random consistency ratio of the matrix, and performing a consistency test; Determine the object of analysis: Determine the object of analysis as "enterprise safety management system"; The judgment matrix A of the four resilience factors in the index is constructed, and then the weight of each index is determined by expert scoring method; S105 determines the classical domain and the node domain matter-element; S106 correlation function and correlation calculation; S107 comprehensive correlation calculation; S108 determines the level of the object-element to be evaluated and obtains the safety resilience evaluation result.

2. The method for evaluating the security management resilience of a power grid enterprise according to claim 1, characterized in that: The hierarchical safety control structure includes two levels: a control layer and a constraint layer; the control layer is the government regulatory agency and the power grid company; the constraint layer corresponds to four indicators: safety assurance, safety supervision, safety guarantee, and safety responsibility.

3. The method for evaluating the security management resilience of a power grid enterprise according to claim 1, characterized in that: Determining the classical domain and node domain matter-elements in S105 includes dividing the enterprise safety management modernization level by referring to the safety risk classification principle, determining the classical domain, and determining the node domain.

4. The method for evaluating the security management resilience of a power grid enterprise according to claim 3 is characterized by: The S108 includes determining the level of security management capability, introducing the correlation calculation method of the next level indicator according to the previous level evaluation indicator, determining the security resilience level of each second level evaluation indicator, calculating the correlation value of each security resilience level respectively, and determining the overall security resilience level.

Images