MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148427295 · doi:10.1109/pes.2007.385442

Impact of Interface Controls on the Steady-State Stability of Inverter-Based Distributed Generators

2007· article· en· W2148427295 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 Power Engineering Society General Meeting · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIslanding Detection in Power Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIslandingInverterControl theory (sociology)Steady state (chemistry)Controller (irrigation)Power (physics)AC powerMaximum power transfer theoremConstant (computer programming)Computer scienceConstant currentDistributed generationElectric power systemAutomatic frequency controlEngineeringCurrent (fluid)Control (management)PhysicsElectrical engineeringTelecommunicationsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a study about the impact of different inverter interface controls on the steady-state stability of inverter-based distributed generators (DG) in the presence of positive feedback anti-islanding schemes. The impact of the constant power controller and the constant current controller on the DG system steady-state stability is compared. The Sandia frequency shift (SFS) anti-islanding control is included in the inverter controllers. The comparison results show that in grid parallel mode the constant current-controlled DG can transfer more power to the connected power system when the local load level is low. However, the constant power-controlled DG has higher power transfer capability for heavy load situations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.224 · 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