MétaCan
Menu
← all works

Power system security assessment

2004· article· en· 395 citations· W2017694201 on OpenAlex· 10.1109/mpae.2004.1338120

Why is this work in the frame?

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

Canadian affiliationAn author listed a Canadian institution. This is the only route the usual frame has.

Full frame distilled prediction

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.

Candidate categories
none
Consensus categories
none
Domain
Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
Study design
Candidate signal: Not applicableConsensus signal: none
Genre
Candidate signal: EmpiricalConsensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score
0.834
Threshold uncertainty score
0.662
Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated · codex-gemma-dda1882f352a

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)

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread
0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Abstract

Security refers to the degree of risk in a power system's ability to survive imminent disturbances (contingencies) without interruption to customer service. It relates to robustness of the system to imminent disturbances and, hence, depends on the system operating condition as well as the contingent probability of disturbances. DSA refers to the analysis required to determine whether or not a power system can meet specified reliability and security criteria in both transient and steady-state time frames for all credible contingencies. Ensuring security in the new environment requires the use of advanced power system analysis tools capable of comprehensive security assessment with due consideration to practical operating criteria. These tools must be able to model the system appropriately, compute security limits in a fast and accurate manner, and provide meaningful displays to system operators. Online dynamics security assessment can provide the first line of defense against widespread system disturbances by quickly scanning the system for potential problems and providing operators with actionable results. With the development of emerging technologies, such as wide-area PMs and ISs, online DSA is expected to become a dominant weapon against system blackouts.

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.

The record

Venue
IEEE Power and Energy Magazine
Topic
Smart Grid Security and Resilience
Field
Engineering
Canadian institutions
Powertech Labs (Canada)
Funders
not available
Keywords
Electric power systemReliability engineeringRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceReliability (semiconductor)Risk analysis (engineering)Computer securityPower system simulationSecurity analysisTransient (computer programming)EngineeringPower (physics)
Has abstract in OpenAlex
yes