Rotor Angle Instability Prediction Using Post-Disturbance Voltage Trajectories
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
A new method for predicting the rotor angle stability status of a power system immediately after a large disturbance is presented. The proposed two-stage method involves estimation of the similarity of post-fault voltage trajectories of the generator buses after the disturbance to some pre-identified templates and then prediction of the stability status using a classifier which takes the similarity values calculated at the different generator buses as inputs. The typical bus voltage variation patterns after a disturbance for both stable and unstable situations are identified from a database of simulations using fuzzy C-means clustering algorithm. The same database is used to train a support vector machine classifier which takes proximity of the actual voltage variations to the identified templates as features. Development of the system and its performance were demonstrated using a case study carried out on the IEEE 39-bus system. Investigations showed that the proposed method can accurately predict the stability status six cycles after the clearance of a fault. Further, the robustness of the proposed method was examined by analyzing its performance in predicting the instability when the network configuration is altered.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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