MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097572261 · doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2003.820424

Critical Impedance Method—A New Detecting Harmonic Sources Method in Distribution Systems

2004· article· en· W2097572261 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Quality and Harmonics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersBC Hydro
KeywordsThévenin's theoremHarmonicElectrical impedanceElectronic engineeringVoltage sourceHarmonic analysisVoltageEquivalent impedance transformsEquivalent circuitEngineeringComputer scienceElectrical engineeringAcousticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a new method for detecting harmonic sources in distribution systems, which is so called "critical impedance method" (CIM), is proposed. The principle of CIM is to compare two magnitudes of harmonic voltage sources in the Thevenin equivalent circuit and choose the larger one as the main harmonic source. A critical impedance is introduced to "measure" the equivalent harmonic voltage source through the measurements of voltage and current at the point of common coupling (PCC). The accomplishment of CIM in different situations is discussed in detail. Several simulation case studies and a series of real system switching tests are performed. The testing results show that the CIM is correct in detecting harmonic sources, simple and realizable in practical applications.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.265 · 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