MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186600816 · doi:10.23977/acss.2021.050106

Transformer Fault Diagnosis Based on Stacking-Ensemble Meta-Algorithms

2021· article· en· W3186600816 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Computer Signals and Systems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Transformer Diagnostics and Insulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClassifier (UML)AdaBoostArtificial intelligenceMargin classifierComputer scienceRandom forestPattern recognition (psychology)Ensemble learningSupport vector machineRandom subspace methodQuadratic classifierMachine learningAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Compared with the method of establishing a single classifier for diagnosis, ensemble learning can combine multiple classifiers to achieve stronger generalization ability. This paper proposed a transformer fault diagnosis method based on Stacking Ensemble multiple classifiers, which can detect the transformer’s internal fault by using its DGA data. The proposed model is consisted of two sections. The first section includes five diagnosis models: Random Forest Classifier, AdaBoost Classifier, Gradient Boosting Classifier, SVM and Extra Trees Classifier. The second section use XGB Classifier as final Meta-Classifier model to classify the faults of transformers by using all the base level model diagnosis results as input. The diagnosis accuracy of the proposed method is 83.3%, which is better than other single Classification method.

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 score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.734

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.229 · 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