MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1580030061 · doi:10.1109/cpre.2015.7102191

Test plan automation for power transformer protective relay commissioning

2015· article· en· W1580030061 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Milton Quinteros, Mark G. Allen, Hussain Al Marhoon, Nagendrakumar Beeravolu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsRelayDigital protective relayTransformerProtective relayAutomationTest planComputer scienceReliability engineeringCircuit breakerSoftwareAutomatic test equipmentEngineeringEmbedded systemVoltageElectrical engineeringPower (physics)Operating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper is to present the implementation of a computer automated Test-Tool program that efficiently produces relay test plans to commission various microprocessor-based relays used to protect power transformers with and without low-side main breakers. The Test-Tool calculates the necessary currents, voltages and digital control conditions based on an automated read of a specific relay settings file. The Test-Tool is then used to interact with the software of a computer-operated test-set by first transferring this information to the test-set and then by acquiring the results of the tests and providing a customized report. This report presents and summarizes the technical information about the power transformer test procedures and its results. As well as being a quality control tool for consistent and thorough relay testing of power transformer installations, this Test-Tool can be used as training support material for new relay technicians and setting engineers.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.219 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower Systems Fault DetectionFrench-language works237,207