A customer value-added reliability approach to transmission system reinforcement planning
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
As customers increasingly demand lower rates and higher reliability in the new competitive market, the challenging task of any electric utility is to minimize the capital investments and operation and maintenance expenditures to hold down electricity rates. If however, the cost is cut too far, it may jeopardize the system's ability to supply reliable power to its customers. The movement towards deregulation will therefore introduce a wide range of reliability issues that will require system reliability criteria and models that can incorporate the residual risks and uncertainties associated with transmission system planning and operating. Customer responsive value-based reliability techniques offer a rational response to emerging conflicting new requirements. This paper presents a customer value-added transmission system expansion and investment technique developed to satisfy ever-increasing customer demands of lower rates and higher service reliability in the competitive market. The developed technique has been applied to a real transmission network reinforcement problem of the Alberta Interconnected System.
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