MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Assessment of Sampled-Values Data Quality on Responses of Time-Frequency Based Digital Relays

2023· article· en· W4379524705 on OpenAlexaff
S. A. Saleh, Julian Meng, E. Ozkop, Marcelo E. Valdes, Terrance J. Hill, Ahmed Al‐Durra

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital protective relayIEC 61850Protective relayElectronic engineeringFinite impulse responseVoltageComputer scienceFrequency responseRelayTransformerWaveformEngineeringElectrical engineeringPower (physics)Automation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Time-frequency based digital protective relays can offer several advantages of high accuracy, improved reliability, and fast response over other protective relays. These protective relays employ half-band digital finite impulse response (FIR) filters to process currents and/or voltages to extract fault signatures, which facilitate accurate detection and identification of fault events. Coefficients of the employed half-band digital FIR filters are determined by wavelet or phaselet functions. The signal processing part in a time-frequency based digital protective relay processes samples of measured currents and/or voltages. As a result, attention has to be paid to the measurement, digitization, and communication of current and voltage data. Power systems utilize the IEC 61850 standard to implement data communication between measurement, control, and protection devices. This paper assesses the impacts of the IEC 61850 sampled values on the accuracy and response speed of time-frequency based digital protective relays. The presented assessment is conducted for two sample cases; the transformer differential protection and arcing current fault detection and identification. Test results show that the accuracy and response speed of time-frequency based digital protective relays are maintained, when measured currents and voltages are communicated using the IEC 61850 sampled values.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.691
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.292 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower Systems Fault DetectionFrench-language works237,207