MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024258530 · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2020.3028047

Roles of Dynamic State Estimation in Power System Modeling, Monitoring and Operation

2020· article· en· W3024258530 on OpenAlexaff
Junbo Zhao, Marcos Netto, Zhenyu Huang, Samson S. Yu, Antonio Gómez‐Expósito, Shaobu Wang, Innocent Kamwa, Shahrokh Akhlaghi, Lamine Mili, Vladimir Terzija, A. P. Sakis Meliopoulos, Bikash C. Pal, Abhinav Kumar Singh, Ali Abur, Tianshu Bi, Alireza Rouhani

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Systems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Optimization and Stability
Canadian institutionsHydro-Québec
FundersSavannah River Operations Office, U.S. Department of EnergyU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Electric power systemScalabilityComputer scienceReliability engineeringSoftwareResilience (materials science)System dynamicsControl engineeringState (computer science)Power system simulationDistributed computingSystems engineeringEngineeringReal-time computingPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Power system dynamic state estimation (DSE) remains an active research area. This is driven by the absence of accurate models, the increasing availability of fast-sampled, time-synchronized measurements, and the advances in the capability, scalability, and affordability of computing and communications. This paper discusses the advantages of DSE as compared to static state estimation, and the implementation differences between the two, including the measurement configuration, modeling framework and support software features. The important roles of DSE are discussed from modeling, monitoring and operation aspects for today's synchronous machine dominated systems and the future power electronics-interfaced generation systems. Several examples are presented to demonstrate the benefits of DSE on enhancing the operational robustness and resilience of 21st century power system through time critical applications. Future research directions are identified and discussed, paving the way for developing the next generation of energy management systems and novel system monitoring, control and protection tools to achieve better reliability and resiliency.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations226
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power SystemsSame topicPower System Optimization and StabilityFrench-language works237,207