MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2978888093 · doi:10.1080/23789689.2019.1666340

Robustness of Ontario power network under systemic risks

2019· article· en· W2978888093 on OpenAlexaffabout
Mohamed Ezzeldin, Wael El‐Dakhakhni

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainable and Resilient Infrastructure · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Systemic riskReliability engineeringComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceRisk analysis (engineering)MedicineEngineeringEconomicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A failure of one or even a few components would have a limited impact on the network-level performance if the negative consequences are compensated for by neighboring components. However, under certain conditions, this component-level failure may not remain localized, but may rather propagate along other components, thus inducing an entire network/system-level cascade (i.e., systemic) risks. In this respect, the current study develops a simplified model of the Ontario Power Network (OPN) to simulate its topology and load demands. The study then evaluates the different OPN characteristics and develops robustness bands for the OPN under both random failures and targeted threats. Finally, the study presents two dynamic vulnerability indices to facilitate detecting the most critical components within power networks. This study is expected to not only expand the Canadian and the international power network topological analysis database, but also to provide the foundation for innovative network-level systemic robustness enhancement solutions.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.641
Threshold uncertainty score0.713

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations26
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainable and Resilient InfrastructureSame topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207