Experimental Assessment of Ground Fault Protection in Frequency-Selective Grounded Systems Fed by a Single Transformer
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents performance assessment of ground fault protection for systems supplied by a transformer, which has frequency-selective grounding. Frequency-selective grounding is a new grounding system that is designed to act as a solid-grounding for high frequency currents, and as a low resistance-grounding for low frequency currents. This grounding system is composed from a parallel <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$R-C$</tex-math></inline-formula> circuit with an equivalent impedance able to affect system zero-sequence currents and ground potentials. Such effects on zero-sequence currents and ground potentials can directly impact the accuracy and response speed of ground fault protection. Effects of frequency-selective grounding on ground fault protection are experimentally assessed for different fault and non-fault events, when the transformer supplies linear and non-liner loads. Experimental results demonstrate responses of various implementations of ground fault protection to fault and non-fault events, when the protected system has frequency selective grounding. Moreover, presented results and discussions aim to demonstrate the ability of frequency-selective grounding to support the operation of ground fault protection during different loading conditions and fault events.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it