MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1826977301 · doi:10.1109/pes.2003.1267334

Selecting an initial condition for normal form analysis

2004· article· en· W1826977301 on OpenAlexaff
N. Kshatriya, U.D. Annakkage, A.M. Gole, I.T. Fernando

Bibliographic record

Venue2003 IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37491) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Optimization and Stability
Canadian institutionsManitoba HydroUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Fault (geology)Nonlinear systemPower (physics)Time domainMathematicsComputer scienceApplied mathematicsPhysicsControl (management)Thermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In normal form (NF) analysis, the nonlinear dynamical system being analyzed is modeled with nonlinearities. If the second order NF is used in the analysis, the nonlinearities only up to second order are modeled. Due to the presence of nonlinearities in the model, the results of second order NF analysis is dependent in the initial conditions [C.-M. Lin et al., May 1996] [S. Zhu et al., November 2001]. If the state of the power system with respect to the stable equilibrium point (SEP), /spl Delta/X/spl Delta//sub 0/, at the instant of removal of the fault is used as an initial condition, then NF analysis may fail to give correct results. It is shown in this paper that the initial condition must be chosen such that the two main assumptions made in NF analysis are met. If the system being studied is stable, the post fault system will eventually reach the SEP. We propose to select an initial condition at an instant subsequent to clearing a fault, to achieve more reliable results from the NF analysis. The time domain simulations are presented to support the analysis.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2003 IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37491)Same topicPower System Optimization and StabilityFrench-language works237,207