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 OpenAlexaff
Deepak Kumar, Subhransu Ranjan Samantaray, Innocent Kamwa

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.

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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

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

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectric Power Components and SystemsSame topicOptimal Power Flow DistributionFrench-language works237,207