MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967065788 · doi:10.1080/15325008.2014.896434

A Radial Path Building Algorithm for Optimal Feeder Planning of Primary Distribution Networks Considering Reliability Assessment

2014· article· en· W1967065788 on OpenAlex

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

VenueElectric Power Components and Systems · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimal Power Flow Distribution
Canadian institutionsHydro-Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)Routing (electronic design automation)Path (computing)Mathematical optimizationMinificationPower (physics)Reliability engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringMathematicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Optimal feeder routing is an important part of general optimal distribution network planning. This article proposes a new algorithm for optimal feeder routing using an easy step-by-step, radial path building algorithm, ensuring minimization of the total system planning cost. Furthermore, reliability assessment is carried out to obtain the most reliable feeder routing to acquire less interrupted network structure with different feeder configurations. The proposed approach is also tested for optimal feeder routing with variations in the number of substations, which provides information on the trade-off between optimality and reliability of the system configuration. Moreover, the concept of principle of optimality is effectively used to make the proposed approach computationally more efficient and useful. The extensive test results reflect the potential ability of the proposed approach for optimizing the network structure in power distribution networks.

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)0.001
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 score0.628
Threshold uncertainty score0.981

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.217 · 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