MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2393566967

MONTE CARLO METHOD FOR PROBABILISTIC TRANSIENT STABILITY ASSESSMENT

2005· article· en· W2393566967 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Csee · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Optimization and Stability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonte Carlo methodProbabilistic logicTransient (computer programming)Computer scienceElectric power systemReliability engineeringStability (learning theory)Fault (geology)Power (physics)EngineeringMathematicsStatisticsArtificial intelligenceMachine learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the basic framework of probabilistic transient stability assessment using Monte Carlo methods. The assessment requires two simulation processes: probability simulation and transient stability simulation of system states associated with fault events. The focus is placed on probability models and Monte Carlo simulation methods. The procedures for two types of studies are provided. The first one is evaluation of average system risk index due to system instability and the second one is determination of a relationship between probability of system instability and a system operation condition for a given fault. The presented method can provide useful information in secure system operation for control centers of utilities. The example given in the paper demonstrates an application of the presented method in an actual power system in Canada.

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.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.215
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.243 · 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