MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097775822 · doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2004.832404

Historic Performance-Based Distribution System Risk Assessment

2004· article· en· W2097775822 on OpenAlexaffabout
R. Billinton

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)IncentiveIT service continuityReliability engineeringElectricityService (business)Work (physics)Order (exchange)Risk analysis (engineering)Remedial educationEngineeringElectricity marketComputer scienceOperations researchEconomicsBusinessFinancePower (physics)MicroeconomicsEconomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regulatory authorities are increasingly adopting performance-based regulation (PBR) in the deregulated electricity industry. A PBR regime is intended to provide distribution utilities with incentives for economic efficiency gains. In order to discourage distribution utilities from sacrificing service reliability while pursuing economic incentives, historic utility performance is utilized as the specified service reliability standard in some places. A reward/penalty structure based on the historic reliability record could be integrated into a PBR plan. Historic reliability data are therefore, extremely important for distribution system risk assessment and remedial work in this new regime. This paper presents actual reliability data taken from the Canadian Electricity Association (CEA) Service Continuity Reports. The financial risk analyzes associated with the historic reliability data are conducted by incorporating reliability index probability distributions in imposed reward/penalty policies. The major cause contributions to the service continuity indices utilizing the CEA cause code categories are analyzed and illustrated. This work should prove useful for those utilities facing the emerging application of PBR.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations66
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power DeliverySame topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207