MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146973638 · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2007.901308

Re-examination of Synchronous Machine Modeling Techniques for Electromagnetic Transient Simulations

2007· article· en· W2146973638 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Systems · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicReal-time simulation and control systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReactanceEmtpTransient (computer programming)Electric power systemDiscretizationComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Synchronous motorTime domainVoltageControl engineeringPower (physics)Electronic engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineeringMathematicsPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper re-examines the three synchronous machine modeling techniques used for electromagnetic transient simulations, namely, the qd model, phase-domain model, and voltage-behind-reactance model. Contrary to the claims made in several recent publications, these models are all equivalent in the continuous-time domain, as their corresponding differential equations can be algebraically derived from each other. Computer studies of a single-machine infinite-bus system demonstrate that all of these models can be used for unsymmetrical operation of power systems. The conversion of machine parameters is also discussed and is shown to have some impact on simulation accuracy, which is acceptable for most cases. When the models are discretized and interfaced with an EMTP-type network solution, the voltage-behind-reactance model is shown to be the most accurate due to its advanced structure.

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 score0.968
Threshold uncertainty score0.897

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.225 · 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