MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400112913 · doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2024.3420421

Maturity Analysis of Protection Solutions for Power Systems Near Inverter-Based Resources

2024· article· en· W4400112913 on OpenAlexaff
Felipe V. Lopes, Moisés J. B. B. Davi, Mário Oleskovicz, Ali Hooshyar, Xinzhou Dong, Adonias A. A. Neto

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHVDC Systems and Fault Protection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo
KeywordsElectric power systemInverterMaturity (psychological)Reliability engineeringElectrical engineeringPower qualityComputer scienceElectronic engineeringPower (physics)EngineeringEnvironmental scienceVoltagePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This review paper studies the literature on protection technologies for power systems near inverter-based resources (IBRs) toward identifying the maturity levels of emerging solutions. Equipment and protection issues that have been investigated in the context of the integration of IBRs are firstly identified, and then, promising emerging protection solutions are assessed regarding attributes like depth of related research, testing experiences using real-world data, availability/feasibility in real protective/control devices and generalization capability. From the obtained results, candidate solutions that may help solving some protection issues that have taken place in systems near IBRs are identified, and challenges that are still to be overcome are highlighted, indicating potential future research and development trends.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations28
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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