MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168454608 · doi:10.1109/naps.2008.5307315

Residential customer outage cost valuation for urban areas in Nepal

2008· article· en· W2168454608 on OpenAlexaff
Nava Raj Karki, Ajit Kumar Verma, Arbind Kumar Mishra, Rajesh Karki, Jayandra Shrestha

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeveloping countryWillingness to payEnvironmental economicsRestructuringBusinessElectricityComputer scienceFinanceEconomicsEngineeringEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Utilities in most of the developing countries do not possess relevant information to evaluate the electricity supply outage cost incurred by the customers. This paper shows the significance of customer survey techniques to evaluate customer outage cost in developing countries in the era of restructuring and globalization. Residential customer surveys that are extensively used by utilities in the developed countries can not be directly adopted in developing countries. Relevant modifications that incorporate customer behaviour in the rapidly changing socio-economic characteristics in those nations must be adequately addressed. The results obtained using customer survey techniques are consistent with the figures anticipated and also indicate toward the need to carry out such surveys for other customer categories as well. The survey questionnaire is designed to obtain customer information to have uninterrupted power supply based on their willingness to pay (WTP), alternative actions and willingness to accept (WTA) monetary compensation for agreeing frequent supply interruptions. The outage cost evaluation is carried out using least square error method by a computer program developed in MATLAB platform.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207