MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406225431 · doi:10.1155/jece/3310174

High‐Impedance Fault Detection in Electric Power Distribution Network Using Local Pattern Transformation Methods and Bidirectional Long Short–Term Memory

2025· article· en· W4406225431 on OpenAlexaff
P. Rini Varghese, M. S. P. Subathra, S. Thomas George, Geno Peter, Albert Alexander Stonier, N. J. Sairamya, A Ananthi, Vivekananda Ganji

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Systems Fault Detection
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformation (genetics)Electrical impedanceFault (geology)Power (physics)Fault detection and isolationTerm (time)Electronic engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringMaterials scienceElectrical engineeringPhysicsChemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The high‐impedance fault (HIF) occurring in medium voltage (MV) distribution networks is dangerous to livestock and personnel due to its arcing nature. The untimely detection of the fault can endanger lives and destroy equipment. Identifying the occurrence of HIF in a power system is a cumbersome task, as fault current falls within the normal current range. The paper analyses current signals from radial and mesh distribution networks and features extracted during HIF and non‐HIF conditions by using the local binary pattern (LBP), local neighbor gradient pattern (LNGP), local neighbor descriptive pattern (LNDP), and local gradient pattern (LGP). In the proposed algorithm, 1D signal analysis for HIF detection in the MV distribution system is performed for the first time for fault analysis. The Kruskal–Wallis test was carried out to get the best feature sets from the extracted features. HIF and non‐HIF were classified by bidirectional long short–term memory (Bi‐LSTM) for the selected feature sets. Among the four algorithms, LGP attains the best accuracy for both networks; hence, the paper recommends that LGP with Bi‐LSTM is more effective for detecting HIF occurrence.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Electrical and Computer EngineeringSame topicPower Systems Fault DetectionFrench-language works237,207