MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098725719 · doi:10.1109/pesmg.2013.6672170

A Type-4 wind power plant equivalent model for the analysis of electromagnetic transients in power systems

2013· article· en· W2098725719 on OpenAlexaff
Dalia Hussein, Mahmoud Matar, Reza Iravani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReal-time simulation and control systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWind powerTurbineComponent (thermodynamics)Control theory (sociology)Power (physics)Induction generatorRange (aeronautics)Electric power systemComputer scienceGenerator (circuit theory)Frequency responseControl engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineeringPhysicsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary form only given. This paper introduces an accurate and computationally efficient reduced-order dynamic equivalent of a Type-4 based wind power plant (WPP) for the analysis of electromagnetic transients (EMTs) in the power system external to the WPP. The proposed model significantly reduces the computational resources and the simulation run time while preserving the WPP response-fidelity in the desired frequency range, e.g., 0 to 50 kHz. The proposed WPP equivalent model is composed of two parts; (i) a frequency-dependent equivalent model which represents the WPP passive component in the entire frequency range, and (ii) a dynamic equivalent model that represents the WPP supervisory control and the aggregated low-frequency dynamics of wind-turbine generator (WTG) units. The latter can be constructed from the (i) dynamic generic models, (ii) vendor-specific models, or (iii) user-defined models. The proposed model is incorporated as a software module in the PSCAD/EMTDC environment and its efficiency and accuracy are verified based on comparing the results with those of a detailed model.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.282

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReal-time simulation and control systemsFrench-language works237,207