MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2554200450 · doi:10.1109/tii.2016.2626782

Enhanced Robustness of State Estimator to Bad Data Processing Through Multi-innovation Analysis

2016· article· en· W2554200450 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Junbo Zhao, Gexiang Zhang, Massimo La Scala, Zhaoyu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Optimization and Stability
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaMinistère de l'Éducation, du Loisir et du Sport Québec
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)EstimatorComputer sciencePhasorMonte Carlo methodRedundancy (engineering)Phasor measurement unitObservableStatistical hypothesis testingAlgorithmElectric power systemMathematicsStatisticsPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To enhance the robustness of a power system state estimator to topology errors, bad critical measurements, multiple non-interacting, or interacting bad data (BD), this paper presents a new robust detection method by exploiting the temporal correlation and the statistical consistency of measurements. Particularly, we propose three innovation matrices to capture the measurement correlation and statistical consistency by processing the forecasted states/measurements and the interpolated reliable information from phasor measurement units. The latter is achieved by using a robust generalized maximum-likelihood estimator. We then propose to apply the projection statistics (PS) to the proposed innovation matrices for BD detection. Extensive Monte Carlo simulations and QQ-plots are carried out to obtain an analytical threshold of the statistical test of the PS. Because of the robustness of PS and the enhanced measurement redundancy by the innovations, the proposed method is able to handle various types of BD in both PMU observable and PMU partially observable power systems. Moreover, the proposed method is suitable for parallel implementation, and can be integrated with online applications. Comparison results with existing methods under different BD conditions on IEEE 14-bus, 118-bus, and Polish 2383-bus test systems demonstrate the effectiveness and robustness of the proposed method.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 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

Citations64
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Industrial InformaticsSame topicPower System Optimization and StabilityFrench-language works237,207