MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2287529450 · doi:10.1049/el.2015.2957

Fast identification of partial discharge sources using blind source separation and kurtosis

2015· article· en· W2287529450 on OpenAlexaff
Minh Au, Basile L. Agba, François Gagnon

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics Letters · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBlind Source Separation Techniques
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKurtosisBlind signal separationIdentification (biology)Separation (statistics)Source separationComputer scienceAlgorithmMathematicsTelecommunicationsStatisticsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A technique for the fast identification of partial discharge (PD) sources is proposed for the detection of mechanical failure or damage to insulation materials by using wireless remote control and monitoring systems in substations. An estimation of the number of PD sources can help to evaluate the insulation performance and lifetime of power equipment. Multiple PD sources can be generated during the operating voltage where their electromagnetic radiations are highly impulsive, non‐Gaussian noise and the resulting probability distribution function is heavy‐tailed. Multiple PD sources can be estimated by their electromagnetic radiations via blind source separation (BSS) and measuring the excess kurtosis using low‐cost wireless intelligent electronic devices. The efficiency and performance of the proposed method is demonstrated by simulating PD sources based on the spatial Poisson point process where the number of sources is a random variable not known by the receiver. Assuming non‐white and decorrelated or non‐Gaussian and independent sources, results show that the number of significant PD sources can be estimated with low error rate. Underdetermined problems in BSS can affect performances.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronics LettersSame topicBlind Source Separation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207