MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286542283 · doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2022.3193037

Correcting the Calculation Method of Commutation Failure Immunity Index for LCC-HVDC Inverters

2022· article· en· W4286542283 on OpenAlexaff
Hao Xiao, Yi Zhang, Ying Xue, Wei Yao

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHVDC Systems and Fault Protection
Canadian institutionsRTDS Technologies (Canada)University of Manitoba
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCommutationFault (geology)Control theory (sociology)Transient (computer programming)GroundReliability engineeringPhase (matter)GridThree-phaseEngineeringElectronic engineeringVoltageComputer scienceMathematicsElectrical engineeringPhysicsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The commutation failure immunity index (CFII) recommended by CIGRE is an useful indicator for quantifying the immunity of LCC-HVDC inverters to the CF. It should be calculated by the electromagnetic transient (EMT) simulations under the worst fault condition that doesn't cause the CF as per its definition. Moreover, the symmetrical three-phase line-to-ground fault has been empirically claimed by CIGRE as the worst one in the previous calculation method. However in this letter, it is firstly found that the unsymmetrical double-phase fault rather than the three-phase one is actually the worst as clearly observed from large numbers of the EMT simulations. This is achieved by the comprehensive analysis of the simulated CF characteristics when taking into account the diversified fault conditions such as fault type, property, severity, initiation time. Secondly, the above interesting finding motivates a corrected CFII calculation method to be proposed considering the double-phase fault. The proposed method is further shown to be more superior than the previous method by the case studies under various ac grid strength.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.241
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

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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power DeliverySame topicHVDC Systems and Fault ProtectionFrench-language works237,207