MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Machine Learning-based Regression and Classification Models for Oil Assessment of Power Transformers

2020· article· en· W3024467871 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

Venue2020 IEEE International Conference on Informatics, IoT, and Enabling Technologies (ICIoT) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Transformer Diagnostics and Insulation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformer oilTransformerDissipation factorComputer scienceDistribution transformerVoltageEngineeringReliability engineeringDielectricElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Expensive and widely used power and distribution transformers need to be monitored to ensure the reliability of the power grid. Evaluating the transformer oil different parameters is vital to determine the transformer insulation health conditions. In this paper, both regression and classification models based on machine learning are used to test the correlation between the interfacial tension values (IFT) of the transformer oil with other oil test results, namely, breakdown voltage, acidity, color, dissipation factor and water content. Experimental results with oil samples obtained for 730 units indicate that both acidity and color have the highest correlation with IFT. Nevertheless, other parameters like breakdown voltage and dielectric dissipation factor contributes marginally in increasing the classifier output accuracy when added to the acidity and color.

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 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 score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.230 · 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