MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2381218207

Recommendations to establish design standard of generator out-of-step capability

2006· article· en· W2381218207 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Meng Ding-zhong

Bibliographic record

VenueElectric Power · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHigh-Voltage Power Transmission Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlackoutGenerator (circuit theory)Transient (computer programming)Electric power systemReliability engineeringElectric power transmissionEngineeringElectric generatorComputer scienceElectrical engineeringPower (physics)Physics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many generators tripped immediately after out-of-step oscillation on August 14, 2003 and worsened the situation of U.S/Canada Blackout. According to American guide lines, generators should be tripped once system out-of-step occurred, it seems they have sufficient generation. The experience in China in many years has proven that even transient instability occurred, all the transmission lines and generators should not be tripped in order to maintain the system integrity, then most of the out-of-step oscillation could be synchronized within short time, thus avoid system disintegration and blackout. There is no international standard regarding this respect, but all the generators have to be designed according to IEC 34-3 Standard. The recommendation for generator out-of-step capability is established according to IEC 34-3 Standard. It is expecting that this recommendation could be coordinated with generator research institute and manufacturers, and also could be used for the design and setting of generator out-of-step protection, thus to achieve the purpose of both power system and generator safety.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0050.001
Research integrity0.0080.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.021

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectric PowerSame topicHigh-Voltage Power Transmission SystemsFrench-language works237,207