MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005790804 · doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2005.852301

A Platform for Validation of FACTS Models

2005· article· en· W2005790804 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 · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Optimization and Stability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransient (computer programming)Controller (irrigation)Control engineeringElectric power systemStability (learning theory)Power flowComputer scienceTransmission systemSIGNAL (programming language)Electronic engineeringEngineeringFlexible AC transmission systemModel validationTransmission (telecommunications)Control theory (sociology)Power (physics)Electrical engineeringControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper presents a platform system for the incorporation of flexible ac transmission systems (FACTS) devices. The platform permits detailed electromagnetic transients simulation as it is of manageable size. It manifests some of the common problems for which FACTS devices are used such as congestion management, stability improvement, and voltage support. The platform can be valuable for the validation of reduced order models such as small signal or transient stability models. The paper presents details on the development and validation of a small signal based model with the inclusion of a Unified Power Flow Controller. The validated model is then used successfully for the design of a feedback controller for improved damping.

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 score0.916
Threshold uncertainty score0.502

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.199 · 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