MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366310763 · doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2023.3268248

Distribution Transformer Failure Prediction for Predictive Maintenance Using Hybrid One-Class Deep SVDD Classification and Lightning Strike Failures Data

2023· article· en· W4366310763 on OpenAlexafffund
Aman Samson Mogos, Xiaodong Liang, C. Y. Chung

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectricity Theft Detection Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSaskPower
KeywordsSupport vector machineTransformerDistribution transformerData miningEngineeringComputer scienceBinary classificationAnomaly detectionArtificial intelligenceReliability engineeringMachine learningVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The distribution transformer in field monitoring data failure may be influenced by its maintenance history and risk index in a distribution network associated with keraunic level, average number of lightning strikes, and protection devices employed. Transformer failure is a rare event, and the number of “failed” labels is much smaller than that of “non-failed” labels. Therefore, the transformer failure prediction can be formulated as an anomaly detection or binary classification with an imbalanced dataset, which is challenging to handle. In this paper, we propose a novel distribution transformer failure prediction method through a hybrid one-class deep support vector data description (SVDD) that uses the synthetic minority oversampling technique (SMOTE) to handle the data imbalance between minority and majority class labels. Minimum redundancy maximum relevance (mRMR) is used as a feature selection technique to improve the model's accuracy. The proposed method uses the current condition data of transformers and the distribution network to predict transformer failure for the next year. Real-world field data for 15,066 distribution transformers is used to train and validate the proposed method. It shows superior performance when compared against five benchmark approaches.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations20
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power DeliverySame topicElectricity Theft Detection TechniquesFrench-language works237,207