MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1941081195 · doi:10.1109/pes.2003.1267355

Practical issues in load modeling for voltage stability studies

2004· article· en· W1941081195 on OpenAlexaff
K. Morison, Hamid Hamadani, Lei Wang

Bibliographic record

Venue2003 IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37491) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Optimization and Stability
Canadian institutionsPowertech Labs (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceStability (learning theory)Electric power systemVoltageInduction motorReliability engineeringComponent (thermodynamics)Power (physics)Control engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Load modeling has become a critical component for the comprehensive and accurate analysis of power systems. In particular, voltage stability limits derived from simulations may be highly influenced by load models used in both static and dynamic analysis. While data for most transmission and generation elements is either well established or can be readily determined from measurement, good load data and models remain difficult to reliably ascertain. This paper discusses the requirements of load models, current approaches, and provides a practical approach to develop models for use in voltage stability analysis. Based on billing data or load inventory surveys, the load is classified into broad types such as residential, industrial, and commercial load and each is subdivided into more specific components including induction motors and other elements. Time-domain simulations are used to establish the load characteristics and general purpose models synthesized from the results for use in static analysis. Examples of this approach are presented in case studies.

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)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations51
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