MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Development of an Automatic Recognition Model for Phase Resolved Partial Discharge Patterns in Hydro-Generators

2022· article· en· W4312441187 on OpenAlexaff
G. Laporte, Ryad Zemouri, Mélanie Lévesque

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater Systems and Optimization
Canadian institutionsHydro-QuébecMila - Quebec Artificial Intelligence Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePattern recognition (psychology)Artificial neural networkUnsupervised learningNoise (video)Representation (politics)Feature extractionPhase (matter)Feature (linguistics)Machine learningImage (mathematics)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whether in the industrial, medical or real-world domains, more and more data is being collected. The common particularity of all these application domains is that a great part of this data is mostly unlabeled. So, learning useful representations with minimal expert supervision is a major challenge in artificial intelligence in the coming years. Recently, there has been a particular interest in unsupervised learning methods based on the idea of autoencoding. The purpose of these methods is to learn a mapping representation from a high-dimensional to a lower-dimensional representation space from which the original observations can be reconstructed. The variational form of these autoencoders, called the Variational AutoEncoders (VAEs), is particularly successful in almost all application areas. This enthusiasm comes from the fact that VAEs allow to take advantage of the theoretical foundations of the Variational Bayesian methods and the learning capabilities of artificial neural networks. In this paper, a model based on the use of VAEs is proposed for the development of an automatic recognition and unsupervised feature extraction of Phase Resolved Partial Discharge (PRPD) results measured from hydro-generators. The first step of this model is the pre-processing phase where external noise were removed. The second step is the learning phase which is based on two concatenated VAEs. Preliminary results indicate that the two-dimensional (2D) reduced latent space configuration encodes the difference in the intensity of the PRPD patterns as well as in the phase shift. More improvement is needed to extract features related to the shape of the PRPD patterns.

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 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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.309
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater Systems and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207