Use of Markov Models in Assessing Spare Transformer Requirements for Distribution Stations
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes a probabilistic method based on Markov models for assessing the number of spare transformers, regular units and mobile units, required for a group of distribution transformers. The proposed method uses two criteria in determining the required number of spare transformers. The first criterion assumes that a pre-determined level of the group availability is given and the number of spare units is determined when the calculated group availability exceeds the pre-determined level of the group availability. The second criterion uses a cost/benefit analysis method in calculating the number of the spare units. In the second criterion, the number of spare units (optimal number) is determined when the total cost (spare unit capital costs and unit outage costs) is minimum. The proposed method is also used to evaluate the impacts of multi-transformer stations (stations with transformer redundancy) and station capabilities for use of mobile unit transformers on the number of spare units. Two distribution transformer groups of the Hydro One's distribution system are used to illustrate the proposed method of assessment and to compare the results obtained using the two criteria.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it