MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145721163 · doi:10.1109/pes.2010.5589655

A strategy for protection coordination in radial distribution networks with distributed generators

2010· article· en· W2145721163 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
TopicPower Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecloserTrippingFuse (electrical)Computer scienceRelaySalientSoftwarePower-system protectionDistributed computingCircuit breakerEngineeringControl engineeringElectric power systemElectrical engineeringPower (physics)Artificial intelligenceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a simple and effective strategy is proposed for the coordination of protective devices in typical radial distribution networks embedding distributed generation units. The proposed strategy benefits from microprocessor-based reclosers and directional elements for feeder relays, and addresses the issues of blinding of protection, false tripping, recloserfuse and fuse-fuse miscoordination, and failed auto-reclosing. Another salient feature of the proposed strategy is that it does not require adaptive protective devices. The effectiveness of the proposed algorithm is demonstrated by simulation case studies conducted on a model of an example distribution network, in the PSCAD/EMTDC software environment. The paper also presents the steps taken to characterize the impact of DGs on the protection coordination, for host and neighboring feeders.

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 score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score0.466

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations105
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower Systems Fault DetectionFrench-language works237,207