Adaptive Power Transformer Lifetime Predictions Through Machine Learning and Uncertainty Modeling in Nuclear Power Plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The remaining useful life (RUL) of transformer insulation paper is largely determined by the winding hot-spot temperature (HST). Frequently the HST is not directly monitored and it is inferred from other measurements. However, measurement errors affect prediction models and if uncertain variables are not taken into account this can lead to incorrect maintenance decisions. Additionally, existing analytic models for HST calculation are not always accurate because they cannot generalize the properties of transformers operating in different contexts. In this context, this paper presents a novel transformer condition assessment approach integrating uncertainty modeling, data-driven forecasting models, and model-based experimental models to increase the prediction accuracy and handle uncertainty. The proposed approach quantifies the effect of measurement errors on transformer RUL predictions and confirms that temperature and load measurement errors affect the RUL estimation. Forecasting results show that the extreme gradient boosting (XGB) algorithm best captures the nonlinearities of the thermal model and improves the prediction accuracy among a number of forecasting approaches. Accordingly, the XGB model is integrated with experimental models in a particle filtering framework to improve thermal modeling and RUL prediction tasks. Models are tested and validated using a real dataset from a power transformer operating in a nuclear power plant.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".