MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1905635524 · doi:10.1109/empd.1998.702760

A new approach to adequacy assessment of small isolated power generating systems

2002· article· en· W1905635524 on OpenAlex
R. Billinton, Mahmud Fotuhi‐Firuzabad, Rajesh Karki

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbabilistic logicElectric power systemComputer scienceReliability engineeringPower (physics)Power system simulationIndex (typography)EngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Probabilistic methods have largely replaced deterministic techniques in the assessment of generating capacity adequacy in large modern electric power utilities. In spite of their widespread applications in large systems, probabilistic methods are not generally applied to small isolated power systems. This paper presents a technique designated as system well-being analysis, which in addition to the conventional risk index, incorporates the accepted deterministic criteria in the definition of system healthy and marginal states. An approach is illustrated in this paper to calculate the well-being indices for small isolated power systems. The well-being approach can be used to assess the adequacy of an isolated system in generating capacity planning. The technique together with the effects on the system well-being of factors such as generating unit sizes and load factor are illustrated by application to practical power systems.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.501

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207