Seismic risk assessment of high-voltage transformers using Bayesian belief networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".