MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1789455423 · doi:10.1109/eeic.1995.482518

Quality assurance testing for large air-cooled generator stator winding insulation

2002· article· en· W1789455423 on OpenAlexaff
J.M. Braun, B. K. Gupta, H.G. Sedding

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsHydro One (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatorReliability engineeringElectromagnetic coilReliability (semiconductor)Generator (circuit theory)Computer scienceAutomotive engineeringQuality assuranceQuality (philosophy)Electric generatorEngineeringPower (physics)Mechanical engineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a growing trend to specify and use smaller generating unit sizes than was prevalent before. Furthermore, this new equipment is often operated at the limits of the design in order to maximize performance. In response to these pressures, electric utilities and independent power producers, are specifying large air-cooled generators with capacities of up to 300 MVA. Due to advances in materials and design, and consequently lower costs, these units compete effectively with hydrogen-cooled machines at these ratings. From a user perspective, there remain concerns which need to be addressed. Within this contribution, attention is focused on outstanding issues related to the problem of testing the stator windings of such machines. The paper discusses those areas of concern which are considered critical to the long term reliability of the stator windings of large air-cooled machines. In addition, efforts currently underway to address some of the issues thus identified are described.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.252
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207