MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119486204 · doi:10.1109/ccece.1998.685631

A comparison of load flow analysis using DistFlow, Gauss-Seidel, and optimal load flow algorithms

2002· article· en· W2119486204 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 institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGauss–Seidel methodPower-flow studyElectric power systemComputer scienceFlow (mathematics)Power flowAlgorithmState (computer science)Power (physics)Control theory (sociology)Iterative methodMathematicsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The state of a power system and the methods of calculating this state are extremely important in evaluating the operation of the power system, the control of this system, and the determination of future expansion for the power system. The state of the power system is determined through load flow analysis that calculates the power flowing in the lines of the system. There are several different methods to determine the load flow of a given system. For the purposes of this paper, only three methods of load flow algorithms are evaluated: Gauss-Seidel, optimal load flow, and the DistFlow 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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.488
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.275
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations37
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptimal Power Flow DistributionFrench-language works237,207