MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1536430162 · doi:10.1109/pes.2004.1372834

Assessment of high voltage auto-transformer spare requirements in bulk transmission systems

2004· article· en· W1536430162 on OpenAlexaff
G. Hamoud, F. Qureshy, A. Elen, L. Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, 2004. · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsHydro One (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpare partAutotransformerReliability engineeringUnavailabilityComputer scienceElectricityEngineeringVoltageOperations managementTransformerElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High voltage auto-transformers represent an important component of bulk transmission systems and are used to transform voltage from one level to another. These auto-transformers are critical for regional load supply, inter-regional load transfers and for certain generator/load connections. Major or catastrophic failures to this equipment can have severe consequences to electric utilities in terms of increased operating costs and customer load losses. To minimize the impact of this type of failures, utilities may carry some spare units to guard against such events. These spare units are going to cost utilities money (utility cost) to purchase, to store and to maintain and utilities should try to strike the right balance between the utility cost and the risk cost (if spare units are not there). This paper describes a probabilistic approach for assessing the risk associated with catastrophic failures of auto-transformers used in bulk transmission systems with and without availability of spare units. The computed risk will be expressed in dollars and will be added to the cost of carrying any spare units. The required number of spare units (optimal) is obtained when the total cost, utility and risk costs, is minimal. Sensitivity studies are carried out to determine the system parameters that have dominant impacts on the optimal number of spares. An example is presented to illustrate the proposed assessment methodology.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, 2004.Same topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207