MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Transmission and Distribution Systems Coordination using the Design Structure Matrix

2023· article· en· W4387006286 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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicProduct Development and Customization
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransmission (telecommunications)Computer scienceMatrix (chemical analysis)Distribution (mathematics)TelecommunicationsMaterials scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The proliferation of distributed energy resources (DERs) is radically changing power system infrastructure planning and operation paradigms. Moreover, DER impacts are reaching the bulk system level and causing a shift in roles and responsibilities at the transmission and distribution (T&D) interface. These changes necessitate active coordination and planning across the T&D interface. However, many research studies do not capture all aspects of function coordination and miss opportunities to minimize tasks repetitions and to improve overall systems’ operation efficiency. In this paper, we apply the design structure matrix (DSM) method to analyze and model the interdependencies of the T&D system interactions. Using DSM clustering and partitioning techniques, we systematically identify coordination opportunities to optimize grid planning. Effectiveness of the proposed DSM method is demonstrated by representing and improving the coordination of T&D operational functions.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicProduct Development and CustomizationFrench-language works237,207