MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Practical Lessons Learned from an Installed Grid-Edge Microgrid

2023· article· en· W4387006327 on OpenAlexaffabout
Keaton A. Wheeler, Jia Guo, Kathryn Paterson, Graeme Edwards, Elizabeth Lee, Michael Simone, Peter X. Zhou

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsEsri (Canada)General Electric (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrogridGridContext (archaeology)Computer scienceTrippingRelayReliability engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineeringRenewable energyCircuit breakerPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the lessons learned from an installed grid-edge microgrid within a distribution utility in rural Western Canada. A discussion on the overall operations and protection takes place to demonstrate the viability of the microgrid during both grid and islanded operations. One lesson that is discussed is setting undervoltage protection to prevent nuisance tripping when black-start capabilities are required during islanded operations. The methodology for overcoming the nuisance tripping is outlined with actual data collected from the implemented system. The use of neutral grounding resistors (NGRs) is also discussed in the context of grid mode relay desensitization. Further demonstration of how the NGR affects islanded operations using the EMTP-RV software is outlined with solutions via a bypass explained in detail. Practical implementation of the bypass is presented using modern infrastructure. Lastly, a case where the NGR bypass fails is discussed with field data to demonstrate the need for NGR considerations within islanded operations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower Systems Fault DetectionFrench-language works237,207