MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392930999 · doi:10.1109/oajpe.2024.3378577

Application of Artificial Intelligence Techniques on Computational Electromagnetics for Power System Apparatus: An Overview

2024· article· en· W4392930999 on OpenAlex
Dinusha Maramba Gamage, Madhawa Ranasinghe, Venkata Dinavahi

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Open Access Journal of Power and Energy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsElectromagneticsComputer sciencePower (physics)Computational electromagneticsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringElectronic engineeringElectromagnetic fieldPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides a review of the most recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) as applied to computational electromagnetics (CEM) to address challenges and unlock opportunities in power system applications. It is intended to provide readers and practitioners in electromagnetics (EM) and related applicable fields with valuable perspectives on the efficiency and capabilities of machine learning (ML) techniques used with CEM tools, offering unparalleled computational advantage. The discussion begins with an overview of traditional computational methods in EM, highlighting their strengths and limitations. The paper then delves into the integration of AI techniques, including ML, deep learning, and optimization algorithms, into CEM frameworks. Emphasis is placed on how AI enhances the accuracy and efficiency of EM simulations, enabling rapid analysis and optimization of power system components and configurations. Case studies and examples illustrate the successful application of AI-based CEM in solving practical challenges in electrical machine modeling, condition monitoring, and design optimizations in power systems. This paper conducts a comprehensive assessment of AI-based CEM techniques, critically evaluating their merits, addressing open issues, and examining the technical implementations within the context of power system applications.

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 score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.326 · 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