MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1987516915 · doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2013.2282264

Unintentional Islanding of Distributed Generation—Operating Experiences From Naturally Occurred Events

2014· article· en· W1987516915 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIslanding Detection in Power Systems
Canadian institutionsHydro One (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIslandingDistributed generationCompensation (psychology)EngineeringElectricity generationLoad SheddingWind powerAC powerElectric power systemDistributed power generationComputer sciencePower (physics)Reliability engineeringElectrical engineeringVoltageRenewable energy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents original records of distributed-generation unintentional islanding events in three categories. The islands were formed by naturally occurred faults without the transfer trip initiated to generation facilities. Hydraulic, natural gas, and wind generators were involved in the events. The records exemplify important issues in DG anti-islanding planning, such as coordination with underfrequency (or undervoltage) load shedding, reactive power compensation, generation-to-load ratio, reclosing coordination, etc. The events reported in this paper can serve as first-hand references in applying IEEE Standard 1547 to distributed generation anti-islanding planning and operation.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.508
Threshold uncertainty score0.807

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.197 · 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