MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092717036 · doi:10.1109/irep.2007.4410557

Interregional long range adequacy overview

2007· article· en· W2092717036 on OpenAlexfundno aff
P.A. Fedora

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOntario Power Authority
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)Probabilistic logicReliability engineeringRange (aeronautics)Resource (disambiguation)Computer scienceTransmission (telecommunications)Operations researchRepresentation (politics)Power transmissionEnvironmental sciencePower (physics)Environmental economicsEngineeringTelecommunicationsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The resource adequacy of Northeast Power Coordinating Council (NPCC) and its neighboring Regions was estimated for the years 2007 -2011, measured by calculating the annual Area Loss of Load Expectation (LOLE) through a consistent multi-area probabilistic reliability assessment. The evaluation considered the uncertainty in forecasted demand, likely completion of proposed transmission and generation projects, anticipated retirements, forced and scheduled outages of generation facilities, demand response programs, and the estimated impacts of operating procedures. The potential for resources expected from proposed market mechanisms designed to provide for future resource adequacy was considered. The evaluation also included the impacts of Sub-Area transmission constraints, and incorporated, to the extent possible, a detailed reliability representation for Regions bordering NPCC.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.164

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower Systems and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207