MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100900237 · doi:10.1109/tcsi.2010.2043992

Shifted-Frequency Analysis for EMTP Simulation of Power-System Dynamics

2010· article· en· W2100900237 on OpenAlexaff
Peng Zhang, José R. Martí, H.W. Dommel

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I Regular Papers · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHVDC Systems and Fault Protection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhasorEmtpElectric power systemTime domainComputer scienceComputationFrequency domainWaveformControl theory (sociology)Dynamic simulationPower system simulationPower (physics)System dynamicsSimulationAlgorithmTelecommunicationsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional power-system dynamic simulation tools make a number of simplifying assumptions to speed up computations; thus, they can only capture snapshots of the system operation, ignoring the dynamics between states. This paper applies the shifted-frequency-analysis (SFA) theory to the Electromagnetic Transients Program (EMTP) simulator in order to efficiently obtain the time-domain simulation results in the neighborhood of the fundamental frequency without making quasi-steady-state or other simplifying assumptions. The SFA-based EMTP simulator can provide dynamic-phasor results that accurately trace the evolution of the system state in three-phase power systems. Dynamic phasors provide envelopes of the time-domain waveforms and can be accurately transformed back to instantaneous time values. Test cases have verified the usefulness of the SFA-based dynamic simulation method.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations89
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I Regular PapersSame topicHVDC Systems and Fault ProtectionFrench-language works237,207