MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125824025 · doi:10.14288/1.0073795

Seismic risk assessment of high-voltage transformers using Bayesian belief networks

2013· article· en· W2125824025 on OpenAlexaff
Tammeen Siraj

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSeismic Performance and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformerProbabilistic logicReliability engineeringEngineeringVoltageVulnerability assessmentHigh voltageComputer scienceElectrical engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Past earthquake records showed that a large magnitude earthquake can cause severe damage to high-voltage substations, which may lead to power disruption for a significant amount of time. A high-voltage transformer is one of the key components of a substation. This thesis proposes a probabilistic framework using Bayesian belief network (BBN) model to predict the vulnerability of a high-voltage transformer for a seismic event. BBN has many capabilities that make it well suited for the proposed risk assessment method. This thesis considers past studies, expert knowledge and reported causes of failures to develop an initial integrated risk assessment framework that acknowledges multiple failure modes. Therefore, the framework incorporates major causes of transformer vulnerability due to seismicity, such as liquefaction, rocking response of transformer, or interaction between interconnected equipment. To demonstrate the application of this framework, this thesis elaborates each step of the framework. Finally, the sensitivity analysis was carried out to evaluate the effects of input variables on transformer damage. The paper also illustrates two predictive models using response surface method (RSM) and Markov chain. The proposed framework is particularly handy to perform, and the results can be useful to support decisions on mitigation measures and seismic risk prediction.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.161 · 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

Citations12
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicSeismic Performance and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207