MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2940115145 · doi:10.1109/isplc.2019.8693385

Fault Diagnostics with Legacy Power Line Modems

2019· article· en· W2940115145 on OpenAlexaff
Gautham Prasad, Yinjia Huo, Lutz Lampe, Anil Mengi, Victor C. M. Leung

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrical Fault Detection and Protection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPrecodingFault (geology)BroadbandComputer sciencePower-line communicationMIMONoise (video)Channel (broadcasting)Line (geometry)Power (physics)Electronic engineeringEngineeringTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We evaluate the use of legacy power line modems (PLMs) for fault diagnostics, and in particular, focus on short-circuit faults in underground power cables. Prior works have shown that broadband power line communication channel estimates that are computed within the PLMs can be used to gain insight into the health of underground cables. However, several legacy PLM chip-set implementations do not provide access to the estimated channel frequency response in its entirety. Therefore, to facilitate and accelerate a practical roll-out of a PLM-based diagnostics solution, we investigate if readily extractable parameters, such as the estimated signal-to-noise ratio values and/or the computed precoding matrices in case of multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) transmission, provide sufficient indication into the cable health status. By extracting suitable features from this raw data, we show through simulations that our machine learning based automated cable diagnostics solution achieves satisfactory results in predicting faults, and near-perfect performance in fault identification.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectrical Fault Detection and ProtectionFrench-language works237,207