A Physics‐Data Driven Approach for Identifying Leakage Users in Low‐Voltage Distribution Systems
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Wiring errors, caused by improper connections between neutral lines and protective earth (PE) lines due to negligence by electrical technicians, are a prevalent type of earth fault in low‐voltage distribution systems (LVDS). These errors can cause the load current of affected users to flow back to the transformer's neutral point via the PE line as residual current, leading to nuisance tripping of residual current devices (RCDs). To maintain normal power supply, users may disable RCDs, which compromises safety and can result in severe hazards such as electric shocks and electrical fires. This paper proposes a method to locate users with wiring errors by leveraging abundant metering data within LVDS and utilising leakage fault analysis devices. We construct a linear model of residual current considering multiple error scenarios. Based on this model, a multiple linear regression (MLR) approach is developed to identify and locate anomalous users by analysing the correlation between their load currents and the residual current of the LVDS. Experimental results under various scenarios validate the performance of the proposed method.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it