MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Novel Highly Precise Power Loss Estimators that Directly Solve Power Balance Equality Constraints

2019· article· en· W3017838192 on OpenAlexaff
Ali R. Al-Roomi, M.E. El-Hawary

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Power System Optimization
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReactanceComputer scienceSusceptancePower system simulationEstimatorControl theory (sociology)AC powerElectric power systemMathematical optimizationPower BalanceTransformerReliability engineeringPower (physics)EngineeringMathematicsElectrical engineeringElectrical impedanceVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Realistic network's branches (including transformers and lines) are not lossless mediums. These power losses happen due to: 1) dissipation as heat by series resistance, 2) absorption as leakage flux by series reactance, and 3) dissipation/absorption by magnetizing conductance and susceptance. Thus, knowing these essential measurements are very important issues in many power system applications and studies, such as: power system operation, protection, reliability, and electricity markets. The existing power loss estimators have many weaknesses, such as: complicated methods, many static assumptions, and dependent on the slack unit. If the existing configuration of any network is randomly changed from its base state, then these estimators may produce insignificant and unacceptable errors. More than that, some applications require to solve a set of power balance equality constraints, such as: optimal power flow, economic load dispatch, and unit commitment. This paper introduces a totally different technique that has the ability to solve all the preceding problems steadily and directly. In this approach, a large number of randomly configured offline power flow solutions are used to create a very big dataset to train artificial neural networks. Through some numerical experiments, this technique proves itself as a highly effective tool to inexpensively and precisely estimate both active and reactive power losses.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Power System OptimizationFrench-language works237,207