MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

GPU-Accelerated Sparse LU Factorization for Concurrent Analysis of Large-Scale Power Systems

2022· article· en· W4292348334 on OpenAlexaff
Sk Subrina Shawlin, Fazel Mohammadi, Afshin Rezaei‐Zare

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE International Conference on Environment and Electrical Engineering and 2022 IEEE Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Europe (EEEIC / I&CPS Europe) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Optimization and Stability
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolverComputer scienceComputationSparse matrixParallel computingComputational scienceGauss–Seidel methodConvergence (economics)Scale (ratio)Gaussian eliminationLU decompositionElectric power systemNewton's methodAlgorithmFactorizationNonlinear systemIterative methodPower (physics)Matrix decompositionGaussianPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analyzing a massive number of Power Flow (PF) equations even on almost identical or similar network topology is a highly time-consuming process for large-scale power systems. The major computation time is hoarded by the iterative linear solver to solve nonlinear equations to achieve convergence. This is a paramount concern for any PF analysis methods, such as Newton-Raphson (NR) method, Gauss-Seidel (GS) method, Fast Decoupled (FD) method, etc. The computation time increases by increasing the size and complexity of the system. This paper presents a GPU-accelerated sparse matrix solver that is fast to be implemented in the real-time and concurrent analysis of large-scale power systems. The achieved results show a computational gain of over six times compared to MATPOWER, which is a well-known tool for PF analysis of power systems.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE International Conference on Environment and Electrical Engineering and 2022 IEEE Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Europe (EEEIC / I&CPS Europe)Same topicPower System Optimization and StabilityFrench-language works237,207