MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3189454113 · doi:10.1029/2020sw002694

Frequency Considerations in GIC Applications

2021· article· en· W3189454113 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

VenueSpace Weather · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEarthquake Detection and Analysis
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeomagnetically induced currentHarmonicsEarth's magnetic fieldSampling (signal processing)Harmonic analysisTransformerGeomagnetic stormGeophysicsMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingPhysicsGeologyElectronic engineeringMagnetic fieldEngineeringVoltageElectrical engineeringOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Geomagnetically induced currents (GIC) are a phenomenon well known for its negative effects on the operations of power systems. To efficiently mitigate them requires different types of power system modeling, from GIC to alternating current harmonic generation, to three‐dimensional finite element models of transformers. GIC are initiated by variations of the geomagnetic field in the presence of the conductive Earth, that is, the geophysical variables characterized by continuous frequency spectra, making GIC also exhibit continuous spectra. In order to adequately estimate their variations and peak values for mitigation purposes, an analysis is required of how sampling rate and spectral frequency content impact the measured characteristics of GIC and harmonics. The study is based on the geomagnetic measurements and the power network data (i.e., GIC and harmonics) with high sampling rates recorded during two geomagnetic storms, March 31, 2001 and July 26–27, 2004. Availability of data covering both the source and the result of geomagnetic storm impacts on power grid allows (a) analysis of the influence of spectral content on adequate representation of both geomagnetic and geoelectric variations during the intervals with significant increases in GIC and harmonics and (b) identifying the sampling rate sufficient to usefully represent the network response presented as GIC and harmonics variations. In summary, the adequate sampling rate is suggested and the deficiencies associated with undersampling of the geoelectric and GIC variations are identified and discussed.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0230.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.201 · 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