MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402816596 · doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2024.3467000

A New Loss of Field Detection Scheme for Synchronous Generators by Incorporating a Dynamic Equivalent Circuit Model

2024· article· en· W4402816596 on OpenAlexaff
Abbas Hasani, Xiaodong Liang, Farhad Haghjoo, Moein Abedini, Claus Leth Bak

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Optimization and Stability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEquivalent circuitElectronic engineeringField (mathematics)Electrical networkScheme (mathematics)Computer scienceElectrical engineeringEngineeringControl theory (sociology)VoltageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a novel loss of field (LOF) detection method is proposed for synchronous generators by utilizing a dynamic equivalent circuit model (DECM). The DECM consists of an internal voltage source and an impedance connected in series, and the two parameters are estimated by measuring three-phase currents, three-phase phase-to-ground voltages, and the rotor speed of the generator. To achieve the proposed detection scheme, an LOF detection index (LFDI) is introduced to detect LOF. To validate the proposed method, an excitation system of the generator using the phase domain (PD) generator model is developed, allowing simulation of various LOF incidents, consistent with IEEE Std. C37.102. The simulated cases include various types of complete and partial LOF events, the stable power swing (SPS) events, and a LOF incidence during the SPS. These cases demonstrate that the proposed LOF detection scheme provides much faster and more secure LOF detection than conventional schemes. The proposed scheme is further validated by experiments in the lab, which demonstrates its feasibility in practical 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.818

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power DeliverySame topicPower System Optimization and StabilityFrench-language works237,207