MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Practical Use Of Protective Relays To Enhance Personnel Safety In Process Industries

2022· article· en· W4385246206 on OpenAlexaff
Michael J. Pilon, Palak Parikh, Thomas Wetmore, Brian S. Morgan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrical Fault Detection and Protection
Canadian institutionsJ. D. Irving (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwitchgearProcess (computing)Protective relayHazardous wasteSafeguardFlammable liquidSetpointReliability engineeringRelayRoamingSoftware deploymentCircuit breakerRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceEngineeringPower (physics)TelecommunicationsElectrical engineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The combination of electrical equipment, flammable chemicals and high-pressure processes in the process industries has placed greater importance on the safety of employees and equipment. Protection relays used for providing reliable power to plant processes can further be utilized to create safe process operations. This paper highlights the enhancement of safety using a protection relay with specific applications of: Thermal-electrical monitoring of critical assets to detect connection hotspots or any intermittent arcing, which can potentially cause a hazardous arc flash event; Enabling the automatic setpoint group changes when personnel are in close vicinity of switchgear or enter into the electrical room; Lowering the sensitive and high-speed protection setpoints during the maintenance around the switchgear; Use of color LCDs to provide users with configurable single line diagrams and customized warning messages to activate when safety measures are enabled. This paper will provide guidance and deployment of safety technologies into the facilities.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.269 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectrical Fault Detection and ProtectionFrench-language works237,207