MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735248921 · doi:10.1109/pedg.2017.7972489

Embedded fault location in DC microgrid systems based on a Lock-In Amplifier

2017· article· en· W2735248921 on OpenAlexaff
Francisco Paz, Martin Ordonez

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrogridLock-in amplifierComputer scienceGridFault detection and isolationElectrical impedanceElectronic engineeringInductanceAmplifierReal-time computingEngineeringElectrical engineeringVoltageActuator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advancements in microgrids and distributed generated systems have created an impetus to distribute protection and management functions throughout a grid. Instead of using a centralized scheduling and protection system, each converter in the grid is expected to contribute to these functions. Many techniques based on impedance detection have been proposed as means to locate faults on a microgrid; however, many of them are not suitable or are too intrusive for a DC microgrid. An accurate detection of the grid impedance (both in magnitude and phase) allows for the accurate detection of the fault, and reduces the effort needed to clear it, in the event that it is necessary to do so. In this work, a novel fault location technique based on a Lock-In Amplifier (LIA) is introduced. This technique makes use of advanced digital algorithms to allow for the accurate detection of the fault location with minimal perturbation of the system's operations. By using both the magnitude and phase of the impedance, the algorithm is able to determine a location based on resistance and inductance, thereby mitigating the effects of errors from any single source. The proposed technique provides three key benefits: 1) high noise immunity, 2) low computational cost, and 3) low perturbation size; moreover, it provides these benefits while also maintaining a high level of accuracy. Simulations of the proposed measurement technique are presented in order to illustrate its behavior, along with experimental validation under different faults.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrogrid Control and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207