MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086844805 · doi:10.7227/ijeee.37.4.8

Distribution System Voltage Regulation and Var Compensation for Different Static Load Models

2000· article· en· W2086844805 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

VenueInternational Journal of Electrical Engineering Education · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimal Power Flow Distribution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Voltage regulationConstant power circuitConstant (computer programming)Compensation (psychology)Electrical impedanceConstant currentVoltageShunt (medical)AC powerElectric power systemCapacitorTransmission systemPower (physics)Computer sciencePower factorEngineeringTransmission (telecommunications)Electrical engineeringPhysicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Voltage regulation computations for distribution systems are strongly dependent on power flow solutions. The classical constant power load model is typically used in power flow studies of transmission or distribution systems; however, the actual load of a distribution system cannot just be modeled using constant power models, requiring the use of constant current, constant impedance, exponential or a mixture of all these load models to accurately represent the load. This paper presents a study of voltage regulation of a distribution system using different static load models. The effect of shunt capacitor compensation is also studied and illustrated in this paper for systems with different static load models.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.613
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.215 · 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