MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338559014

Rough neural fault classification for hvdc power systems

2008· article· en· W2338559014 on OpenAlexaffabout
Liting Han

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFault (geology)Electric power systemWaveletContext (archaeology)Fault indicatorFault coverageData miningSet (abstract data type)Artificial neural networkIdentification (biology)Computer scienceArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Fault detection and isolationEngineeringPower (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This Ph.D. thesis proposes an approach to classify faults that commonly occur in a High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) power system. These faults are distributed throughout the entire HVDC system. The most recently published techniques for power system fault classification are the wavelet analysis, two-dimensional time-frequency representation for feature extraction and conventional artificial neural networks for fault type identification. The main limitation of these systems is that they are commonly designed to focus on a group of faults involved in a specific area of a power system. This thesis introduces a framework for fault classification that covers a wider range of faults. The proposed fault classification framework has been initiated and developed in the context of the HVDC power system at Manitoba Hydro, which uses what is known as the TranscanTM system to record and archive fault events in files. Each fault file includes the most active signals (there are 23 of them) in the power system. Testing the proposed framework for fault classification is based on fault files collected and classified manually over a period of two years. The fault classification framework presented in this thesis introduces the use of the rough membership function in the design of a neural fault classification system. A rough membership function makes it possible to distinguish similar feature values and measures the degree of overlap between a set of experimental values and a set of values representing a standard (e.g., set of values typically associated with a known fault). In addition to fault classification using rough neural networks, the proposed framework includes what is known as a linear mean and standard deviation classifier. The proposed framework also includes a classifier fusion technique as a means of increasing the fault classification accuracy.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.389
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicPower Systems Fault DetectionFrench-language works237,207