MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Time Series Anomaly Detection for Smart Grids: A Survey

2021· article· en· W3217174898 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAnomaly Detection Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnomaly detectionComputer scienceSmart gridGridAnomaly (physics)Time seriesPower gridPower (physics)Data miningReal-time computingEngineeringElectrical engineeringMachine learningGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the rapid increase in the integration of renewable energy generation and the wide adoption of various electric appliances, power grids are now faced with more and more challenges. One prominent challenge is to implement efficient anomaly detection for different types of anomalous behaviors within power grids. These anomalous behaviors might be induced by unusual consumption patterns of the users, faulty grid infrastructures, outages, external cyberattacks, or energy fraud. Identifying such anomalies is of critical importance for the reliable and efficient operation of modern power grids. Various methods have been proposed for anomaly detection on power grid time-series data. This paper presents a short survey of the recent advances in anomaly detection for power grid time-series data. Specifically, we first outline current research challenges in the power grid anomaly detection domain and further review the major anomaly detection approaches. Finally, we conclude the survey by identifying the potential directions for future research.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.750
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.227 · 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