MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3007472460 · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2020.2976834

Test Systems for Voltage Stability Studies

2020· article· en· W3007472460 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Optimization and Stability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectric power systemVoltageStability (learning theory)Computer scienceControl theory (sociology)Set (abstract data type)EngineeringVoltage optimisationReliability engineeringControl engineeringTask (project management)Voltage regulationPower (physics)Control (management)Electrical engineeringSystems engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the two test systems for voltage stability studies set up by the IEEE PES Task Force on “Test Systems for Voltage Stability Analysis and Security Assessment” under the auspices of the Power System Stability Subcommittee of the Power System Dynamic Performance Committee. These systems are based on previous test systems, making them more representative of voltage stability constraints. A set of representative results are provided for both systems, with emphasis on dynamic simulation. They illustrate various aspects such as long-term dynamics, voltage security assessment, real-time detection, and corrective control of instabilities. The value for educators, researchers and practitioners are emphasized.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.205 · 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