A cascade of artificial neural networks to predict transformers oil parameters
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper artificial neural networks have been constructed to predict different transformers oil parameters. The prediction is performed through modeling the relationship between the insulation resistance measured between distribution transformers high voltage winding, low voltage winding and the ground and the breakdown strength, interfacial tension acidity and the water content of the transformers oil. The process of predicting these oil parameters statuses is carried out using various configurations of neural networks. First, a multilayer feed forward neural network with a back-propagation learning algorithm was implemented. Subsequently, a cascade of these neural networks was deemed to be more promising, and four variations of a three stage cascade were tested. The first configuration takes four inputs and outputs four parameter values, while the other configurations have four neural networks, each with two or three inputs and a single output; the output from some networks are pipelined to some others to produce the final values. Both configurations are evaluated using real-world training and testing data and the accuracy is calculated across a variety of hidden layer and hidden neuron combinations. The results indicate that even with a lack of sufficient data to train the network, accuracy levels of 84% for breakdown voltage, 95% for interfacial tension, 56% for water content, and 75% for oil acidity predictions were obtained by the cascade of neural networks.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it