MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170320502 · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2005.862000

Bulk Electric System Well-Being Analysis Using Sequential Monte Carlo Simulation

2006· article· en· W2170320502 on OpenAlexaff
Wijarn Wangdee, R. Billinton

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Systems · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodElectric power systemProbabilistic logicComputer scienceReliability engineeringTransmission systemTransmission (telecommunications)EngineeringPower (physics)StatisticsMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is growing interest in combining deterministic considerations with probabilistic assessment in order to evaluate the "system well-being" of a composite generation and transmission system and to evaluate the likelihood not only of entering a complete failure state but also the likelihood of being very close to trouble. This paper presents bulk electric system well-being analysis using sequential Monte Carlo simulation. This approach provides accurate frequency and duration assessments and the index probability distributions associated with the mean values. The basic N-1 security criterion is used as the deterministic requirement for incorporating a deterministic consideration in a probabilistic assessment to monitor system well-being. The results shown in this paper indicate that the system well-being concept can provide comprehensive knowledge on what the degree of system vulnerability might be under a particular system condition. The basic concepts and their application in composite power system well-being analysis are illustrated by application to a small practical test 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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations79
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power SystemsSame topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207