MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141549267 · doi:10.1109/ccece.1999.808218

Allocation of transmission losses in a deregulated power system network

2003· article· en· W2141549267 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
TopicElectric Power System Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransmission (telecommunications)Computer scienceTransmission lossGenerator (circuit theory)Electric power systemDeregulationAC powerTransmission networkPower (physics)Transmission systemControl theory (sociology)TelecommunicationsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Full deregulation would allow bilateral contracts between the suppliers and the buyers. This concept, however, leads to the confusion of transmission loss sharing and generation of the reactive power. Two methods, incremental load flow approach (ILFA) and marginal transmission loss approach (MTLA), have been developed to determine a generator's share of transmission loss in a fully deregulated power system. ILFA is very simple and employs the load flow technique in an iterative way. MTLA is basically a mathematical modeling of the transmission losses based on Kron's loss formula in a fully deregulated network. It calculates marginal increase in transmission loss due to an increase in load. These methods along with some numerical results have been presented in the paper.

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 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 score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations26
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Power System OptimizationFrench-language works237,207