MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366449621 · doi:10.1109/mpe.2023.3247106

How to keep the lights on: Lessons from major blackouts over the last 35 years [Editors’ voice]

2023· article· en· W4366449621 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Innocent Kamwa

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Power and Energy Magazine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLightning and Electromagnetic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlackoutMeteorologyPower (physics)Electrical engineeringHarmonicsTelecommunicationsStormPower gridEngineeringElectric power systemAeronauticsVoltageGeographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At the time of this writing, in January 2023, Québec is remembering the 1998 ice storm, which occurred on Friday, 9 January, 34 years ago. Falls of more than 100 mm of freezing rain literally pulverized part of the Hydro-Québec electrical network, blacking out more than 4 million people. This day has gone down in history asBlack Friday. About 24,000 wooden poles, 900 pylons, and 3,000 km of power lines were cut down. Some households would only find power after five to six weeks (Figure 1). Such a weather-driven blackout was not the first to hit Québec province. On 13 March 1989, solar winds disrupted the Earth’s magnetic field, causing seven static var compensators (SVC) to disconnect from the grid in 1 min, due to excessive harmonics currents. Following the loss of the dynamic voltage support provided by the SVCs, the instability of the power system became inevitable. A major outage of the entire Québec network resulted, leaving 6 million people without power for 9–12 h.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0110.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.004

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Power and Energy MagazineSame topicLightning and Electromagnetic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207