MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380285883 · doi:10.3390/f14061146

Power Distribution System Faults and Wildfires: Mechanisms and Prevention

2023· article· en· W4380285883 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sahan Bandara, Pathmanathan Rajeev, Emad Gad

Bibliographic record

VenueForests · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverhead (engineering)Natural disasterPower (physics)Distribution (mathematics)Computer scienceCritical infrastructureRisk analysis (engineering)Computer securityEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental scienceForensic engineeringEngineeringBusinessMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wildfires are one of the most hazardous natural disasters in Australia in terms of fatalities, property damage and financial losses. Events of catastrophic wildfires are recorded across the world including in the United States and Canada. Failures along power distribution infrastructure and network faults have been identified as some of the causes for the initiation of wildfires. Thus, it is critical to better understand the mechanisms and the potential prevention strategies for wildfires caused by power distribution system faults. In this light, this paper presents how the power distribution network faults cause wildfires highlighting the main mechanisms. Further, this paper reviewed studies on recent advancements for the prediction, detection and prevention of wildfires. Condition assessment of power distribution infrastructure including poles, crossarms, overhead cables and other attachments are paramount to detect potential defects and to carry out timely replacements which can subsequently mitigate the possibility of wildfire initiation. Therefore, this paper summarized the studies on condition monitoring and surveillance techniques for power distribution infrastructure. Altogether, this paper aimed to enhance the awareness about the prevention strategies for wildfires caused by power distribution system faults.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations27
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForestsSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207