MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086062117 · doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2010.2060214

Recognition of Fault Transients Using a Probabilistic Neural-Network Classifier

2010· article· en· W2086062117 on OpenAlexaff
Athula Rajapakse

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial neural networkProbabilistic logicComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceClassifier (UML)Probabilistic neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Machine learningTime delay neural networkEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the applicability of decision tree, hidden Markov model, and probabilistic neural-network (PNN) classification techniques to distinguish the transients originating from the faults from those originating from normal switching events. Current waveforms due to different types of events, such as faults, load switching, and capacitor bank switching were generated using a high-voltage transmission system simulated in PSCAD/EMTDC simulation software. Simulated transients were used to train and test the classifiers offline. The wavelet energies calculated using three-phase currents were used as input features for the classifiers. The results of the study showed the potential for developing a highly reliable transient classification system using the PNN technique. An online classification model for PNN was fully implemented in PSCAD/EMTDC. This model was extensively tested under different scenarios. The effects of the fault impedance, signal noise, current-transformer saturation, and arcing faults were investigated. Finally, the operation of the classifier was verified using actual recorded waveforms obtained from a high-voltage transmission 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations66
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power DeliverySame topicPower Systems Fault DetectionFrench-language works237,207