MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006519446 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2008.4564878

Design strategy for optimum rating selection in interline DVR

2008· article· en· W2006519446 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hamid Reza Karshenas, Majid Moradlou

Bibliographic record

VenueConference proceedings - Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Quality and Harmonics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSelection (genetic algorithm)Computer scienceVoltagePower (physics)Reliability engineeringEnergy (signal processing)AC powerEnergy storageElectronic engineeringEngineeringMachine learningElectrical engineeringMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is concerned with design strategy for optimizing the total rating of an interline dynamic voltage restorer (IDVR). DVR has been used in distribution networks for several years as a mean to mitigate voltage sags. In designing a DVR, there is always a trade-off between the size of energy storage system and the rating of DVR. An IDVR, which is two DVRs installed in two feeders with common dc bus, has the capability of active power exchange between two DVRs, and thus the energy storage device is not an issue. Therefore, the design criteria for the selection of rating of an individual DVR are not applicable in IDVR structure. In this paper, the basic equations governing the operation of an IDVR are obtained. The important factors which cause the difference between IDVR and individual DVRs are addressed. A new step by step design procedure is proposed with the objective of optimum selection of rating for an IDVR structure. Illustrative examples are given to show the applicability of the proposed method.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations18
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConference proceedings - Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer EngineeringSame topicPower Quality and HarmonicsFrench-language works237,207