MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977800054 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2012.6335038

Selective upgrading of transmission lines using DTCR

2012· article· en· W1977800054 on OpenAlexaff
Pawel Pytlak, Petr Musı́lek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicThermal Analysis in Power Transmission
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmpacityElectric power transmissionReliability (semiconductor)Transmission lineReliability engineeringInvestment (military)Computer scienceLine (geometry)Return on investmentTransmission (telecommunications)Power (physics)TelecommunicationsEngineeringElectrical engineeringProduction (economics)Electrical conductorEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Upgrading or constructing new power transmission lines is a very costly and time consuming endeavour. To overcome line capacity problems, some utilities have began to employ an alternative approach of incorporating Dynamic Thermal Circuit Rating (DTCR) technologies into their existing transmission lines to harness underutilized line capacity. However, capacity gains that can be obtained from DTCR technologies may be hampered by certain segments of given transmission line should they have an overall lower ampacity rating compared to the remaining parts of the line. If such bottlenecks exist, the overall ampacity rating of the entire line is decreased. To maximize gains from DTCR technology, this paper presents an intelligent approach of analyzing an existing transmission line and searching out bottlenecks by using high-resolution meteorological data. The system uses an optimization technique to identify segments that will provide the greatest return on investment. Carrying out the suggested upgrades will, in turn, increase the reliability and provide additional transmission capacity gains. Thus, the proposed system will allow utility companies to increase the gains from DTCR technology, while maximizing the return on investment in construction and upgrading projects.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.324
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicThermal Analysis in Power TransmissionFrench-language works237,207