Hybrid DGA Method for Power Transformer Faults Diagnosis Based on Evolutionary <i>k</i>-Means Clustering and Dissolved Gas Subsets Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Considered as the heart of electrical power transmission and distribution networks, power transformers are essential part of the electricity transmission grid. Among the condition monitoring and fault diagnosis tools for these machines, dissolved gas analysis (DGA) has proven its effectiveness in their early detection and classification of faults. Up to date, many methods have been proposed in the literature for the interpretation of DGA data, classified into traditional and intelligent methods. This article proposes a two-step hybrid method, which uses the strengths of both methods. The approach uses the evolutionary${k}$-means clustering algorithm (k-MCA) based on the genetic algorithm (GA) for subset formation and subset analysis by human expertise. In the diagnostic procedure, to determine the condition of a sample, the subset to which it belongs is first identified and then the corresponding diagnostic sub-model is applied. The proposed method has been implemented with 595 DGA data, tested on 254 DGA data, and validated on the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) TC10 database. Their performances were evaluated and compared with existing traditional, intelligent, and hybrid methods. From the results obtained with the IEC TC10 database, the newly proposed approach depicts the best overall diagnosis accuracies. Indeed, the best performance is achieved with the proposed method compared to other models in the literature, with diagnostic accuracy of 98.29% compared to 88.89% of the Gouda triangle method, to 88.03% of the Hyosun Corporation gas ratio method, or to 86.32% of the three ratios technique.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".