MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393621421 · doi:10.14569/ijacsa.2024.01503127

A Machine Learning-based Solution for Monitoring of Converters in Smart Grid Application

2024· article· en· W4393621421 on OpenAlexaff
Umaiz Sadiq, Fatma Mallek, Saif Ur Rehman, Rao Muhammad Asif, Ateeq Ur Rehman, Habib Hamam

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvertersComputer scienceGridSmart gridEngineeringElectrical engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The integration of renewable energy sources and the advancement of smart grid technologies have revolutionized the power distribution landscape. As the smart grid evolves, the monitoring and control of power converters play a crucial role in ensuring the stability and efficiency of the overall system. This research paper introduced a converter monitoring system in photovoltaic systems, the main concern is to protect the electrical system from disastrous failures that occur when the system is in operating condition. The reliability of the converters is significantly influenced by the degradation of their passive components, which can be characterized in various ways. For instance, the aging of inductors and capacitors can be char-acterized by a decrease in their inductance and capacitance values. Identifying which component is undergoing degradation and assessing whether it is in a critical condition or not, is crucial for implementing cost-effective maintenance strategies. This paper explores a set of classification algorithms, leveraging machine learning, trained on data collected from a Zeta converter simulated in Matlab Simulink. the report presents observations on how each algorithm effectively predicts the component and its condition and Graphical Performance Comparison for different ML Techniques serves as a crucial endeavor in evaluating and understanding the effectiveness of various ML approaches. The goal is to provide a comprehensive overview of how these techniques fare concerning criteria such as accuracy, precision, recall, F1 score, and Specificity among others. Quadratic Support Vector Machine (SVM) yields superior results compared to other machine learning techniques employed in training our dataset.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Advanced Computer Science and ApplicationsSame topicSmart Grid Security and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207