MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2244182783 · doi:10.1109/epec.2015.7379928

A generic algorithm for peak fault current calculation in HVDC links

2015· article· en· W2244182783 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed E. Nassar, Ramadan El Shatshat, M.M.A. Salama

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReactanceCurrent (fluid)InductanceFault (geology)Control theory (sociology)Controller (irrigation)AlgorithmFault current limiterComputer scienceVoltagePhysicsElectrical engineeringEngineeringPower (physics)Electric power systemControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies the effect of different DC-link's parameters on the magnitude of peak fault current in the DC link. Formulae are presented to calculate the peak fault current. These formulae are presented for different controller's response time considering/neglecting source inductance (overlap). This paper proposes two algorithms to calculate the peak fault current, based on the results obtained, an approximate formula is derived to give an estimate for the peak fault current for different pre-fault current values. Also, a generic algorithm is proposed to calculate the peak fault current accurately for a delayed or an instantaneous controller action considering or neglecting source reactance.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower Systems Fault DetectionFrench-language works237,207