MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392693761 · doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2024.3376535

General Multi-Phase Element-Based Load Flow for AC–DC Power Systems

2024· article· en· W4392693761 on OpenAlexafffund
Shima Bz Homayie, Bala Venkatesh

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHVDC Systems and Fault Protection
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsElectric power systemPower flowElectrical engineeringThree-phasePower-flow studyControl theory (sociology)Power (physics)AC powerComputer scienceEngineeringPhysicsVoltageControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep electrification of energy systems is expected in the future and distribution systems are pegged to grow several folds interconnecting numerous distributed energy resources such as wind, solar and storage. Accordingly, certain sections of the distribution systems will be meshed to provide a higher reliability due to their critical and enlarged role in energy systems. Furthermore, just like solar farms that internally use DC networks and interface with unbalanced multi-phase AC systems, it is expected that DC networks will continue to expand within AC distribution systems due to advancements in power electronic solutions. Therefore, a multi-phase AC–DC load flow that models both meshed and radial multi-phase topologies is an important analytical tool. Thus far, the literature reports a limited number of methods and restricted commercial grade solutions. To address this challenge, a novel multi-phase AC–DC load flow method is proposed. This method handles diverse multi-phase AC - DC network topologies and component types such as branches, transformers and controllable converters using an element-based modeling technique modeling self and mutually induced voltage drops as dependent voltage sources. Tested across various systems, this method has proven to be robust, computationally efficient, and faster than traditional node-based AC–DC load flow method, while maintaining the same level of accuracy and monotonic convergence.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.003

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power DeliverySame topicHVDC Systems and Fault ProtectionFrench-language works237,207