MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166434031 · doi:10.1109/pes.2006.1709163

On the accuracy of state estimation

2006· article· en· W2166434031 on OpenAlexaff
S. Lefebvre, Jacques Prévost, H. Horisberger, B. Lambert

Bibliographic record

Venue2006 IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFault Detection and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsHydro-Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLeast-squares function approximationState (computer science)EstimationAlgorithmApplied mathematicsMathematicsStatisticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper illustrates a weakness of state estimation in regard of modeling errors. The Q-V model is in general much more complex than the P-delta model, and Q-V solutions can be badly affected by relatively small modeling errors even when its P-delta part is accurate. The paper analyses the impact of model inaccuracies and measurement bias on the solutions. Solution algorithms examined are least-squares, a modification of it called DWLS, and Huber

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.173
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.173
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2006 IEEE Power Engineering Society General MeetingSame topicFault Detection and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207