MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313572607 · doi:10.3390/en16020640

Assessment of the Performance of Phasor-Based and Transients-Based Faulted Phase Identification Techniques in the Presence of Inverter Interfaced Resources

2023· article· en· W4313572607 on OpenAlexaff
Sachintha Kariyawasam, Jagannath Wijekoon, Athula Rajapakse

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhasorInverterTransient (computer programming)EngineeringIdentification (biology)Electric power systemThree-phasePhotovoltaic systemControl engineeringElectronic engineeringComputer sciencePower (physics)Electrical engineeringVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Faulted phase identification is one of the segments of conventional system protection that is severely vulnerable in the presence of inverter-based resources (IBR) such as Type IV wind and solar PV power plants. The work presented in this paper investigates the effect of IBRs on the conventional phasor-based faulted phase identification methods widely implemented in contemporary commercial protection relays using theoretical analysis and simulation results. Moreover, this premise is further validated by testing commercial line protection relays using hardware-in-the-loop simulations. This paper also evaluates the applicability of recently proposed transients/incremental quantities-based techniques to overcome the deficiencies of conventional methods to correctly identify the faulted phase in systems with IBRs through real-time and control hardware-in-the-loop simulations. Comparisons with commercial relays show that transient/incremental quantities-based methods are more suitable for systems with a high penetration of IBRs.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicPower Systems Fault DetectionFrench-language works237,207