MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039950026 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2006.277577

GIC Modelling for an Overdetermined System

2006· article· en· W2039950026 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandre A. Trichtchenko, D. H. Boteler, Aidan Foss

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLightning and Electromagnetic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverdetermined systemGeomagnetically induced currentBlackoutElectric power systemTransformerSingular value decompositionApplied mathematicsMathematicsComputer sciencePower (physics)EngineeringAlgorithmVoltagePhysicsElectrical engineeringMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Geomagnetically induced currents in power systems can cause problems ranging from overload of transformers to power blackout. Modelling can be used to show the GIC flow throughout a power system; however, the modelled GIC values have uncertainties because of the simplifying assumptions. Measurements of GIC in transformer neutral-ground connections are usually only available from a few substations. The best GIC information could be obtained by combining the measured GIC values with GIC modelling. In this paper we show how GIC measurements can be integrated into the modelling process. Model solutions are presented using two different methods. Normally, the system can be solved by matrix inversion to give a unique solution. Adding measured GIC values leads to an overdetermined system of linear equations. We show that a solution can be obtained by using the general least squares estimation procedure based on the singular value decomposition technique. The method of solution is demonstrated using a hypothetical power system

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLightning and Electromagnetic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207