MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2076196121 · doi:10.1109/pes.2010.5589385

Topology information based decision trees to predict dynamic transfer limits and their sensitivities for Hydro-Quebec's network

2010· article· en· W2076196121 on OpenAlexaffabout
J.A. Huang, Gaëtan Vanier, L. Loud, Sébastien Guillon, J.-C. Rizzi, F. Guillemette

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
Canadian institutionsHydro-Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimit (mathematics)Sensitivity (control systems)Computer scienceTransfer functionNetwork topologyRange (aeronautics)Maximum power transfer theoremTransfer (computing)Domain (mathematical analysis)Data miningTopology (electrical circuits)Power (physics)EngineeringMathematicsElectronic engineeringParallel computingPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a method, using data mining techniques, to find dynamic power transfer limits and sensitivity of the limits due to element variations for the Hydro-Quebec power system based on topology information. The paper illustrates a systematic way to automatically generate a tremendous amount of cases to represent a wide range of parameter variations and compute their corresponding transfer limits based on time-domain dynamic simulations. These transfer limits are used to determine the transfer limit sensitivity for each parameter. Data mining techniques are used to build regression trees on this huge database, generated by the supercomputer at IREQ (the Hydro-Quebec Research institute), to find the relationship between either the transfer limits or the Δlimits and parameter variations. The benefit of this method is its ability to determine limits and/or Δlimits without requiring time-domain simulations in future studies. Rapid access to these limits and the sensitivities of the status of specific elements can potentially be foreseen to aid planning engineers in the planning and execution steps of limit calculations.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRough Sets and Fuzzy LogicFrench-language works237,207