Bibliographic record
Abstract
Batteries and chargers have for the longest time provided the support of electrical distribution protection and control systems. A DC battery bank of suitable size, (often oversized for multiple reasons) and a charger to keep the batteries in a reliable condition is often the solution of choice. As well several other methods have been used to support tripping power in the event of system upset. This discussion will describe a innovative and superior method to support protection and control power supply which is a radical departure from existing methods. Although in existence for sometime in Europe it is coming into its own recently with several installations in the US and recent introduction to Canadian markets. The premise is basically that high-pressure air provides the backup energy for the P&C system when normal source AC power is degraded or lost. This system provides all the benefits of AC and or DC UPS power without any of the drawbacks of standard battery utilization. It is reliable and virtually maintenance free and can be replenished after use by an on site compressor or re-supply in the form of new air bottles. It can be used inside or outside and has a footprint similar to standard batteries but without any special venting requirements. The paper will explore the origins of this technology and do some side-by-side comparisons with more conventional UPS. Cost versus benefit will be explored as well as maintenance and testing requirements. A typical P&C application will be defined and reviewed for design and installation using several methods with a technical and commercial analysis performed. Air ups will be a game changer in the future this presenter believes. Air ups makes sense, it is hear now and it is a realistic and intelligent alternative to battery support for many applications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.126 | 0.096 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".