MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Method to Detect DC Bias in Transformers Using Differential Current Waveforms

2022· article· en· W4292388196 on OpenAlexaff
Babak Ahmadzadeh‐Shooshtari, 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 Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeomagnetically induced currentDC biasCurrent transformerTransformerWaveformControl theory (sociology)Direct currentElectronic engineeringComputer scienceGeomagnetic stormElectrical engineeringVoltageEngineeringPhysicsEarth's magnetic fieldMagnetic field

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a DC bias detection method for the power transformers, which utilizes the three-phase differential current waveforms available in the differential relays. It is shown that the DC bias condition can be detected from the asymmetry of the differential current waveforms, which occurs due to the transformer core saturation under the DC bias. It is also shown that the proposed scheme can identify the DC bias with and without the current transformer (CT) saturation. Furthermore, time-domain simulations verify the method's effectiveness in discriminating between the DC bias and transformer energization conditions. The proposed method is easy to implement and contributes to the power system monitoring by providing reliable DC bias detection for the transformers in the conditions such as hybrid AC-DC systems, monopolar operation of HVDC systems, and the geomagnetically induced current (GIC) flow due to a solar geomagnetic storm.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
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 Systems Fault DetectionFrench-language works237,207