A Test Case for the Calculation of Geomagnetically Induced Currents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Geomagnetically induced currents (GICs) in power systems can be attributed to problems ranging from transformer overheating, misoperation of protective relays, and voltage instability. The assessment of the geomagnetic hazard to power systems requires accurate modeling of the GICs that are expected to occur. However, to date, there are no publicly available test cases to validate software programs used to compute GIC. The following paper presents a hypothetical network that can be used as a test case for validating results from GIC modeling software. The network contains many features found in real networks such as: different voltage levels, two- and three-winding transformers and autotransformers, multiple transmission lines in the same corridorn and GIC blocking devices. GIC is calculated in the network for two geoelectric field scenarios: a 1 V/km uniform Northward electric field and a 1 V/km uniform Eastward electric field. Detailed simulation results and corresponding input data are provided for each of the two scenarios. Simulation results that are provided have been validated using four independent GIC modeling programs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".