MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Fault detection and localization based on Decision Tree and Support vector machine algorithms in electrical power transmission network

2022· article· en· W4310520310 on OpenAlex
Nouha Bouchiba, Azeddine Kaddouri

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

Venue2022 2nd International Conference on Advanced Electrical Engineering (ICAEE) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDecision treeComputer scienceToolboxSupport vector machineFault (geology)MATLABTransmission (telecommunications)AlgorithmFault detection and isolationPower transmissionFault tree analysisFault indicatorPower (physics)Machine learningArtificial intelligenceReliability engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces an application of machine learning algorithms. In fact, support vector machine and decision tree approaches are studied and applied to compare their performances in detecting, classifying, and locating faults in the transmission network. The IEEE 14-bus transmission network is considered in this work. Besides, 13 types of faults are tested. Particularly, the one fault and the multiple fault cases are investigated and tested separately. Fault simulations are performed using the SimPowerSystems toolbox in Matlab. Basing on the accuracy score, a comparison is made between the proposed approaches while testing simple faults, on the one hand, and when complicated faults are integrated, on the other hand. Simulation results prove that the support vector machine technique can achieve an accuracy of 87% compared to the decision tree which had an accuracy of 53% in complicated cases.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.221 · 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