MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2294657436 · doi:10.1109/icpst.1998.729045

Thyristor aging

2002· article· en· W2294657436 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michael Cepek, C.P. Krishnayya

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsHydro-Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThyristorReliability (semiconductor)Integrated gate-commutated thyristorLife expectancyReliability engineeringMOS-controlled thyristorElectrical engineeringPower (physics)Computer scienceEngineeringVoltageMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thyristor is the work horse of power electronics today and its reliability has a major effect on the reliability of the equipment which employs it. This is especially true in case of HVDC, SVC and other FACTS valves because they use large numbers of thyristors connected in series. It is generally believed that thyristors are not subject to aging because they have no moving parts to wear and because they are designed to operate at temperatures well below the levels where serious decrease in lifetime expectancy could be expected. The intention of this paper is to call the attention of electric utilities, who operate the high voltage valves, to the fact that cases of systemic deterioration of thyristor characteristics have been observed in some equipments operated by Hydro-Quebec (Canada). It is not important whether the cause of the thyristor deterioration is classified as aging or materializes as a consequence of inadequate design, manufacturing defects or even user's own negligence. It is important that if the phenomenon exists, more serious problems than randomly failed thyristors are likely to develop. If it is recognized early, preventive maintenance should be considered.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.157
Teacher spread0.148 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207