MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016351089 · doi:10.1109/mia.2003.1176457

Reliability Methodologies Applied to the IEEE Gold Book Standard Network

2003· article· en· W2016351089 on OpenAlexaff
D.O. Koval, Xinlie Zhang, J.E. Propst, Robert Arno, R. S. Hale

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Industry Applications Magazine · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)Reliability engineeringKey (lock)Component (thermodynamics)Computer sciencePoint (geometry)EngineeringSet (abstract data type)Power (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several key reliability indices for industrial and commercial customers are a knowledge of the reliability and the frequency and duration of load point interruptions within their electrical power system networks at their facilities. A reliable equipment data source is key to an accurate analysis. Data sources, such as The IEEE Gold Book provide the user with the necessary data parameters to evaluate the reliability of industrial and commercial power system network configurations. An accurate understanding of component reliability and maintenance actions will provide the necessary availability indices for a reliability analysis approach. This paper discusses The IEEE Bold Book Standard Network and three reliability models: spreadsheet reliability model; GO software tool; and minimal cut-set reliability analysis methodology.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.004

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations23
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Industry Applications MagazineSame topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207