MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975313192 · doi:10.1109/pes.2011.6039195

Experiences in system voltage monitoring and control in evolving power grid and application of control room tools

2011· article· en· W1975313192 on OpenAlexafffund
Asher Steed, Veera Raju Vinnakota, Djordje Atanackovic, Michael Yao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Optimization and Stability
Canadian institutionsBC Hydro (Canada)
FundersBC Hydro
KeywordsElectric power systemControl (management)Computer scienceVoltageGridControl systemControl engineeringPower (physics)Reliability engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

System voltage control has been a challenging task in the BCHydro power system due to generating resources located far from load centers. The system is supported by emergency and quasi emergency measures such as load shedding and auto-var schemes. In addition, operating orders cover extensive voltage control measures. Due to recent changes in electric power system structure and market driven operational changes electric power system operation has increased in its complexity. Historically Control Room staff have been supported by off-line tools in the past progressively increasing the use of tools in the control room. Use of emergency schemes supported by real time tools has been an approach matured over several years of use. More recent are the upgrading the stability tools with technological progress and use of formal optimization tools as well. The authors share their experiences of managing system voltages including normal and emergency measures and also procedures such as auto-var schemes, automatic under-voltage load shedding schemes supported by tools in EMS to arm the load shedding schemes, formal optimization tools, etc., with the technologies that are mature enough for use in control room.

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 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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.451
Threshold uncertainty score0.319

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower System Optimization and StabilityFrench-language works237,207