MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174092725 · doi:10.3390/en14123654

Distributed Learning Applications in Power Systems: A Review of Methods, Gaps, and Challenges

2021· review· en· W3174092725 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectricity Theft Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Electric System Operator
KeywordsComputer scienceDistributed computingElectric power systemField (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningDistributed learningAnomaly detectionPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, machine learning methods have found numerous applications in power systems for load forecasting, voltage control, power quality monitoring, anomaly detection, etc. Distributed learning is a subfield of machine learning and a descendant of the multi-agent systems field. Distributed learning is a collaboratively decentralized machine learning algorithm designed to handle large data sizes, solve complex learning problems, and increase privacy. Moreover, it can reduce the risk of a single point of failure compared to fully centralized approaches and lower the bandwidth and central storage requirements. This paper introduces three existing distributed learning frameworks and reviews the applications that have been proposed for them in power systems so far. It summarizes the methods, benefits, and challenges of distributed learning frameworks in power systems and identifies the gaps in the literature for future studies.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.301 · 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