Algorithm to Prevent Breaker-Failure Protection Mal-operation Due to Subsidence Current
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Duplication of circuit breakers (CBs) in substations is not realistic due to economic and operational constraints. In the event of failure of a breaker, adjacent breakers need to be called in to isolate the fault. Typically, a breaker-failure protection (BFP) function is integrated within commercial relays to monitor such situations. However, these functions are prone to mal-operation because of subsidence in current transformers (CTs) resulting from faults with significant decaying DC component. To this end, a reliable reset algorithm for the BFP function is presented in this paper. After measuring the decaying DC component within a one-cycle moving window, the proposed algorithm accurately distinguishes between the alternating pattern of fault current and exponential decaying pattern in subsidence current. Its performance remains unaffected during change in fault current level, decaying dc component, CT saturation and level of subsidence. Results from simulation as well as laboratory setup indicate that the proposed algorithm is able to prevent the mal-operation of an existing BFP scheme in the conventional relay with safety margin in the range of 20-40%. A comparative evaluation with available techniques testifies its superiority.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".