Feasibility study of maintenance cost reduction in redundant customer delivery systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maintenance is carried out on various transmission system components to keep their performance within acceptable standards and to maintain their average life expectancy. The cost associated with maintenance work is largely dependent on how often maintenance routines are performed and on the level of work to be done. Current maintenance routines on transmission system components are normally performed in accordance with equipment manufacturer's guidelines and modified by field experts as maintenance experience is gained. The implementation of the reliability-centred maintenance (RCM) in the electricity industry has reengineered the maintenance practices and has resulted in a significant saving to the industry. One area where an additional maintenance cost saving can be made is the customer delivery system with a redundancy in supply. In this system, the loss of one supply path would not adversely affect the reliability of supply to customers. By doing less frequent maintenance on one or both supply paths, some cost saving can be made without jeopardizing the reliability of supply to customers. This paper describes the study that was performed recently at Hydro One to assess the impact of reduced component maintenance cycles on the reliability' of redundant customer delivery systems. A cost/benefit analysis was performed to determine the possible consequences of reduced maintenance and to decide whether or not to stretch out the component maintenance cycle
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".