MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096319640 · doi:10.1109/epec.2009.5420813

BC Hydro's methodology for energy losses assessment in distribution systems

2009· article· en· W2096319640 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimal Power Flow Distribution
Canadian institutionsBC Hydro (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRisk analysis (engineering)Energy conservationComputer scienceDistribution (mathematics)Reliability engineeringEnergy (signal processing)Environmental economicsEngineeringBusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Current utility business and regulatory environments impose new demands and constraints on the development, operation, and maintenance of distribution systems. There is increasing pressure to ensure that all aspects of distribution utility operations are appropriately and optimally managed. The strong interest in achieving efficiency targets related to energy conservation is encouraging utilities to incorporate and implement more rigorous investments plans for distribution losses reduction. For this reason, utilities need to understand the cause of the energy losses, the methodologies to assess them, and the measures to reduce them in a cost-effective manner. This paper presents a methodology for assessing technical and non-technical energy losses in distribution systems that has been successfully implemented at BC Hydro. It also discusses techniques to manage and reduce energy losses.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.538

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptimal Power Flow DistributionFrench-language works237,207