MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2243728798 · doi:10.1109/epec.2015.7379968

A review of short-circuit models of wind generators

2015· review· en· W2243728798 on OpenAlexaff
Chandrabhanu Opathella, Birendra N. Singh, Bala Venkatesh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Turbine Control Systems
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWind powerConvertersShort circuitComputer scienceElectric power systemEquivalent circuitVoltagePower (physics)Representation (politics)Electrical engineeringWind speedElectronic engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the rapid increase of wind penetration in power systems, researchers have looked at various consequences of wind integration. Short-circuit current contribution of wind generators is one of these concerns. Numerous studies have been carried out with different models of wind generators to plan and operate power systems accounting short-circuit current contributions of WGs. Fixed speed, semi variable speed and doubly fed WGs are modeled as voltage sources behind their short-circuit reactances. This representation is similar to the short-circuit model of conventional synchronous generators. Beside this conventional modeling approach, doubly fed and full converter connected WGs are also modeled as constant current sources. This approach captures the short-circuit response of fast reacting crowbars, choppers and converters. This paper provides a review and explanation of these models as well as their applications in power system planning and can serve as a reference for electrical utility planners who are accountable for correct applications of models.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.005

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWind Turbine Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207