MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086309685 · doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2013.2239314

An Optimal Composition and Placement of Automatic Switches in DAS

2013· article· en· W2086309685 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems and Technologies
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecloserAutomationNetwork topologyElectric power systemPower (physics)Circuit breakerComputer scienceComposition (language)EngineeringElectrical engineeringTopology (electrical circuits)Electronic engineeringComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes an algorithm for determining the optimal composition which means number of links and section switches in a feeder and placement of automatic switches in a distribution automation system (DAS). A DAS is configured by automatic switches and reclosers on a power distribution line. The composition and placement of switches affect the operational applications of a DAS. More switches lead to better DAS operation but also to increased cost and maintenance. Thus, this paper proposes an approach to determining the optimal composition and placement of automatic switches. Additionally, the proposed algorithm is developed considering various system topologies in a real field. The algorithm was tested on an example power distribution system with eight-feeders and on a real power distribution system operated by KEPCO in Young-Deung-Po and Jeju, South Korea.

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 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.399

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.211
Teacher spread0.203 · 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