MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293010207 · doi:10.3390/computation10090144

A Review and Taxonomy on Fault Analysis in Transmission Power Systems

2022· review· en· W4293010207 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

VenueComputation · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityUniversité LavalUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTaxonomy (biology)Computer scienceFault (geology)Electric power systemData scienceGridPower gridPower transmissionSystems engineeringReliability engineeringRisk analysis (engineering)Power (physics)EngineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Enhancing resiliency in a power grid system is one of the core mandates of electrical distribution companies to provide high-level service. The power resiliency research community has proposed numerous schemes, to detect, classify, and localize fault events. However, the literature still lacks a comprehensive taxonomy of these schemes which can help advance future research. This study aims to provide a compact yet comprehensive review of the state-of-the-art solutions to fault analysis in transmission power systems. We discuss fault types and several fault-analysis methodologies adopted by relevant research works, propose a novel framework to classify these works, and highlight their strengths and limitations. We anticipate that this brief review would be helpful as a literature review and benefit the research community in choosing suitable techniques for fault analysis.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.253 · 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