Phase angles as predictors of network dynamic security limits and further implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the United States, the number of Phasor Measurement Units (PMU) will increase from 166 networked devices in 2010 to 1043 in 2014. According to the Department of Energy, they are being installed in order to “evaluate and visualize reliability margin (which describes how close the system is to the edge of its stability boundary).” However, there is still a lot of debate in academia and industry around the usefulness of phase angles as unambiguous predictors of dynamic stability. In this paper, using 4-year of actual data from Hydro-Québec EMS, it is shown that phase angles enable satisfactory predictions of power transfer and dynamic security margins across critical interface using random forest models, with both explanation level and R-squares accuracy exceeding 99%. A generalized linear model (GLM) is next implemented to predict phase angles from day-ahead to hour-ahead time frames, using historical phase angles values and load forecast. Combining GLM based angles forecast with random forest mapping of phase angles to power transfers result in a new data-driven approach for dynamic security monitoring.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".