Incorporating reliability index probability distributions in performance based regulation
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
The move towards deregulation in the electric power industry has created a new climate of competition and customer choice. There are also concerns that customer reliability could suffer under the new regime. Performance based regulation (PBR) is being introduced in a number of jurisdictions in an attempt to maintain an acceptable balance between appropriate customer service qualities and customer service costs. A reward/penalty structure integrated in a PBR plan works like a contract that penalizes and/or rewards a utility based on its performance and in doing so introduces an element of financial risk to an electric power utility due to the uncertainty associated with maintaining a specific level of system reliability. This paper illustrates the utilization of time sequential Monte Carlo simulation to develop reliability index probability distributions for a feeder, a bus and a system, and assesses such risks by incorporating reliability index probability distributions into the reward/penalty structure. The paper applies this approach using some real system reliability data from Canadian service continuity reports. These concepts should prove useful for regulatory agencies responsible for setting initial PBR procedures in place, and for electric power utilities to reduce their risk and increase their rewards in the new environment.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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