MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2545900367

Damage assessment and soft reliability evaluation of existing transmission lines

2005· article· en· W2545900367 on OpenAlexaff
Ibrahim Hathout

Bibliographic record

VenueProbabilistic Methods Applied to Power Systems, 2004 International Conference on · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInfrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsHydro One (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)Reliability engineeringMargin (machine learning)Fuzzy logicTransmission lineElectric power transmissionSensitivity (control systems)Cumulative distribution functionProbability distributionFunction (biology)Line (geometry)Computer scienceStructural engineeringMathematicsProbability density functionEngineeringStatisticsArtificial intelligenceElectronic engineeringMachine learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces a methodology for reliability assessment of existing-transmission structures and lines in the presence of structural deterioration. A model for damage assessment of existing-transmission structures is proposed. The model uses fuzzy weighted averages formula (FWA) and utilizes a fuzzy computational technique called resolution identity of fuzzy sets. The damage-state of the structure or line is a fuzzy function that can be used to fuzzily or soften the probability of failure of the existing transmission-structure or line. The model for probability of failure is derived as a function of the cumulative distribution of the standardized safety margin and the damage-state of the structure or line. The probability of failure is then expressed in terms of the first four moments of the safety margin probability distribution function. The proposed method produces a realistic reliability assessment of existing structures or line. A numerical example is given.

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)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.735
Threshold uncertainty score0.801

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.319 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProbabilistic Methods Applied to Power Systems, 2004 International Conference onSame topicInfrastructure Maintenance and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207