Well-being reliability worth indices due to different customer outage cost functions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evaluation of the costs and benefits of competing investments is a standard practice in power system planning. Customer outage costs, which serve as surrogates for the perceived worth of supply reliability, have been determined, among others, for several provinces and countries as diverse as Canada, United Kingdom, Nepal and Thailand. This paper uses the well-being framework to evaluate the societal worth of electric service reliability in subtransmission systems associated with the outage cost functions of the above four systems. System well-being is defined in terms of the system being in the healthy, marginal, and at risk states, hence combining the deterministic and probabilistic approaches into a single framework. Reliability worth indices such as expected cost of interruptions (ECOST) and interrupted energy assessment rate (IEAR) are evaluated. The concepts are illustrated by application to a small but comprehensive reliability test system designated RBTS.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it