MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

347/600 Volt Arc Flash Mitigation at British Columbia Hydro

2023· article· en· W4385246245 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrical Fault Detection and Protection
Canadian institutionsBC Hydro (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlash (photography)Arc (geometry)Arc flashProcess (computing)EngineeringComputer scienceElectrical engineeringEnvironmental scienceMechanical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

British Columbia Hydro (BC Hydro) initially approached an arc flash program development by performing engineering assessments to calculate incident energies across our power system. Due to the complexity of our 347/600 Volt distribution secondary system and the difficulty of determining site-specific details, potential incident energy ranges were determined. Use of the highest incident energy value within the ranges would have resulted in major impacts to our workers (employees and contractors) and customers. Based on this, we worked with our engineering teams to develop arc flash mitigation options that would be less impactful and used a structured decision-making [4] process to engage stakeholders. From this process we identified several options that could reduce the arc flash impact to workers and customers. This paper details how we minimized the arc rated PPE impact to our workers through the development of a 347/600 Volt, arc flash mobile application to calculate site-specific incident energy and the use of temporary insulation to reduce the probability of the arc flash occurring.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.186 · 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