MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2621263100 · doi:10.1109/access.2017.2710285

Multiple Power Line Outage Detection in Smart Grids: Probabilistic Bayesian Approach

2017· article· en· W2621263100 on OpenAlexaff
Ashfaq Ahmed, Muhammad Awais, Muhammad Naeem, Muhammad Iqbal, Waleed Ejaz, Alagan Anpalagan, Hongseok Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMathematical optimizationConvergence (economics)Probabilistic logicSmart gridLine (geometry)HeuristicElectric power systemAlgorithmPower (physics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Efficient power line outage identification is an important step which ensures reliable and smooth operation of smart grids. The problem of multiple line outage detection (MLOD) is formulated as a combinatorial optimization problem and known to be NP-hard. Such a problem is optimally solvable with the help of an exhaustive evaluation of all possible combinations of lines in outage. However, the size of search space is exponential with the number of power lines in the grid, which makes exhaustive search infeasible for practical sized smart grids. A number of published works on MLOD are limited to identify a small, constant number of lines outages, usually known to the algorithm in advanced. This paper applies the Bayesian approach to solve the MLOD problem in linear time. In particular, this paper proposes a low complexity estimation of outage detection algorithm, based on the classical estimation of distribution algorithm. Thanks to an efficient thresholding routine, the proposed solution avoids the premature convergence and is able to identify any arbitrary number (combination) of line outages. The proposed solution is validated against the IEEE-14 and 57 bus systems with several random line outage combinations. Two performance metrics, namely, success generation ratio and percentage improvement have been introduced in this paper, which quantify the accuracy as well as convergence speed of proposed solution. The comparison results demonstrate that the proposed solution is computationally efficient and outperforms a number of classical meta-heuristics.

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)0.000
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 score0.519
Threshold uncertainty score0.897

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.248 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations25
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicPower Systems Fault DetectionFrench-language works237,207