MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2798649356

Residential Transformer Overloading Risk Assessment Using Clustering Analysis.

2018· article· en· W2798649356 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ming Dong, Benzhe Li, Alex Nassif

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformerAsset managementPortfolioReliability engineeringCluster analysisPopulationComputer scienceEngineeringRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessElectrical engineeringFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Residential transformer population is a critical type of asset that many electric utility companies have been attempting to manage proactively and effectively to reduce unexpected failures and life losses that are often caused by transformer overloading. Within the typical power asset portfolio, the residential transformer asset is often large in population, having lowest reliability design, lacking transformer loading data and susceptible to customer loading behaviors such as adoption of distributed energy resources and electric vehicles. On the bright side, the availability of more residential operation data along with the advancement of data analytics techniques have provided a new path to further our understanding of local residential transformer overloading risks statistically. This research developed a new data-driven method to combine clustering analysis and the simulation of transformer temperature rise and insulation life loss to quantitatively and statistically assess the overloading risk of residential transformer population in one area and suggest proper risk management measures according to the assessment results. Case studies from an actual Canadian utility company have been presented and discussed in detail to demonstrate the applicability and usefulness 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 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 score0.500
Threshold uncertainty score0.772

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.159 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207