MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1822002551 · doi:10.1109/pes.2004.1373278

Tie line equivalent constrained assisting generator model (TEAG) considering forced outage rates of transmission systems-II

2004· article· en· W1822002551 on OpenAlexaff
Jaeseok Choi, Thanh Toan Tran, S.I. Moon, D.W. Park, Jae-Young Yoon

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, 2004. · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)Tie lineTransmission lineElectric power transmissionElectric power systemGenerator (circuit theory)Computer scienceReliability engineeringTransmission (telecommunications)Transmission systemLine (geometry)Power (physics)Point (geometry)Power transmissionSimple (philosophy)Control theory (sociology)EngineeringElectrical engineeringMathematicsTelecommunicationsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper illustrates a tie line constrained equivalent assisting generator (TEAG) model considering forced outage rates of transmission systems for reliability evaluation of interconnected power systems. Interconnections between power systems can provide the improved levels of reliability. It is expected that the TEAG model developed in this paper will give a solution to problems, which are an optimal interconnected point and tie line capacity decisions, etc., related to the effect of transmission system uncertainties in the reliability evaluation of interconnected power systems. The characteristics and concept of this TEAG considering transmission systems are described in detail by case studies on a simple test system.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 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

Citations7
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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