MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1984636526 · doi:10.1109/elinsl.2008.4570308

An Approach to Determine the Health Index of Power Transformers

2008· article· en· W1984636526 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Transformer Diagnostics and Insulation
Canadian institutionsKinectrics (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability engineeringDissolved gas analysisTap changerTransformerWeightingBushingComputer scienceCondition monitoringEngineeringTransformer oilElectrical engineeringVoltageStructural engineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a realistic health index formulation method for power transformers using readily available data. The method considers practical limitations on obtaining data, and the possible constraints on the parameters. It also utilizes IEC, IEEE, and CIGRE criteria for condition parameters. This Health Index calculation considers not only typical test results such as dissolved gas analysis (DGA), oil quality, furan, and power factor, but also other parameters such as tap changer and bushing condition, physical observations, load history, maintenance work orders, and age. The calculation includes condition ratings, weighting factors, and assigned scores for specific condition parameters. By using a multi-criteria analysis approach, the method combines the various factors into a condition-based health index.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.466
Threshold uncertainty score0.217

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.211 · 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