MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1911958716 · doi:10.1109/pes.2005.1489346

DC voltage limit compliance in voltage-source converter based multi-terminal HVDC

2005· article· en· W1911958716 on OpenAlexaff
Weixing Lu, B.T. Ooi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, 2005 · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHVDC Systems and Fault Protection
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDropout voltageForward converterElectrical engineeringVoltageĆuk converterVoltage regulationVoltage sourceLow-dropout regulatorVoltage multiplierHVDC converter stationVoltage dividerBoost converterReset (finance)Flyback converterVoltage referenceVoltage regulatorComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)EngineeringFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By adjusting V/sub ref/, the voltage reference setting of the DC voltage regulator or the power reference settings P/sub i//sup sp/ of the remaining converter stations, the steady-state DC bus voltages of the voltage-source converter based multi-terminal HVDC system can be made to comply with voltage limits. When any one of the converter stations is lost, over-voltage can destroy a converter station within a fraction of a second. As there is no time to reset the settings, the references must be determined in the very beginning to anticipate the accidental loss of a converter. The paper shows how the well-known voltage sensitivity method and the Lagrange multiplier method are adapted successfully to determine the reference settings for pre- and post-fault conditions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations10
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, 2005Same topicHVDC Systems and Fault ProtectionFrench-language works237,207