MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2708557496 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2017.7946625

Optimal coordination of directional overcurrent relays using hybrid BBO-LP algorithm with the best extracted time-current characteristic curve

2017· article· en· W2708557496 on OpenAlexaff
Ali R. Al-Roomi, M.E. El-Hawary

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOvercurrentMathematical optimizationComputer scienceOptimization problemFault (geology)Dimension (graph theory)Nonlinear systemProtective relayAlgorithmCurrent (fluid)MathematicsRelayEngineeringElectrical engineeringPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The coordination problem of directional overcurrent relays (DOCRs) is considered as a highly constrained, nonlinear, and non-convex optimization problem. The summation of the operating times of all DOCRs, when they act as primary protective devices, is taken as the objective function that needs to be minimized. This stiff problem is mostly optimized based on IEC standard inverse time-current characteristic curve (TCCC) and using discrete plug setting (PS) to simulate electromechanical DOCRs. From the literature, some few papers have solved this coordination problem by using different TCCCs. However, this approach increases the problem dimension by 250%, which in turn consumes more CPU time and needs more iterations for converging to near-optimal solutions. Moreover, coordinating DOCRs with different TCCCs could violate the selectivity criteria in some unconsidered fault locations, because satisfying the optimality at the near-end 3φ faults does not guarantee the feasibility of other fault locations. This paper solves all these points by heuristically selecting the best TCCC among a large variety of North American and European standard TCCCs. In addition, this paper utilizes the advanced features available in modern numerical relays to obtain new solutions based on continuous PS. The performance of the proposed BBO-LP optimization technique is evaluated using a 15-bus system.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower Systems Fault DetectionFrench-language works237,207