MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017694201 · doi:10.1109/mpae.2004.1338120

Power system security assessment

2004· article· en· W2017694201 on OpenAlexaff
K. Morison, L. Wang, P. Kundur

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Power and Energy Magazine · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsPowertech Labs (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectric power systemReliability engineeringRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceReliability (semiconductor)Risk analysis (engineering)Computer securityPower system simulationSecurity analysisTransient (computer programming)EngineeringPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.007

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations395
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Power and Energy MagazineSame topicSmart Grid Security and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207