MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4255213437 · doi:10.1109/icps.2018.8369995

DC microgrid grounding strategies

2018· article· en· W4255213437 on OpenAlexaff
Jafar Mohammadi, Firouz Badrkhani Ajaei, G.C. Stevens

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHVDC Systems and Fault Protection
Canadian institutionsJacobs (Canada)S2e Technologies (Canada)Western University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGroundMicrogridReliability (semiconductor)Reliability engineeringEngineeringStray voltageFault (geology)Electrical engineeringTransient (computer programming)Earthing systemMode (computer interface)VoltageComputer sciencePower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grounding strategy of a DC microgrid affects the stray current level, the common-mode voltage, the energy supply reliability, personnel/equipment safety and protection system design. Therefore, a comprehensive knowledge of the available grounding strategies and their effects is essential for design and operation of the DC microgrid components and especially its protection. This paper investigates and compares characteristics of different DC microgrid grounding strategies that involve the choice of grounding configurations and grounding devices. The study includes the grounding strategy impacts on line-to-ground (LG) fault detection and protection, transient LG fault current magnitude, stray current level, common mode voltage, personnel/equipment safety, system reliability, service continuity, and insulation requirements. Finally, the strengths and weaknesses of the various grounding strategies are 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHVDC Systems and Fault ProtectionFrench-language works237,207