MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2655606959 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2017.7946717

Data fusion for fault diagnosis in smart grid power systems

2017· article· en· W2655606959 on OpenAlexafffund
Mojtaba Kordestani, Mehrdad Saif

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersUniversity of Windsor
KeywordsFault (geology)Smart gridElectric power systemComputer scienceSensor fusionWavelet transformCircuit breakerArtificial neural networkReliability (semiconductor)WaveletOperator (biology)Real-time computingFault detection and isolationGridData miningPower (physics)Reliability engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In smart grid power systems, fast and accurate fault detection and diagnosis (FDD) is vital for isolating faulty components and avoiding further complications. This paper introduces a new data fusion method based on ordered weighted averaging (OWA) operator for power smart grids. For this purpose, the discrete time data from circuit breakers (CB) is combined with continuous time data of recorders to enhance the reliability of the fault diagnosis approach. Radial basis functions (RBF) artificial neural network and wavelet transform (WT) are individually employed to identify the location of the fault from the continuous voltage of the buses. Then, a combination of these two methods along with the information from CBs are utilized into a unique framework by OWA operator to diagnose the faults at an early stage. IEEE standard 14 bus system is used to illustrate and validate the proposed method. Several phase to ground faults are injected into the simulation model to validate the diagnostic capability of the FDD system. Simulation results show a better performance of the fusion FDD system in comparison with three other methods.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
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

Citations23
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower Systems Fault DetectionFrench-language works237,207