MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415168695 · doi:10.1049/icp.2025.1796

E-REDES Solution to monitor and analyse underfrequency load shedding performance

2025· article· en· W4415168695 on OpenAlexaff
António Eliseu, João Filipe Oliveira, Miguel Veríssimo, Miguel Louro, José V. Couto, Ricardo V. Fernandes

Bibliographic record

VenueIET conference proceedings. · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsNetwork for Business Sustainability
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlackoutLoad SheddingElectric power systemRenewable energyPower (physics)Stability (learning theory)GridControl theory (sociology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Underfrequency Load Shedding (UFLS) is a vital protection scheme to ensure power system stability and integrity, preventing a cascading drop in frequency and potential widespread blackout by automatically disconnecting progressive l oad steps in a timeframe of a few seconds. While UFLS is rarely triggered, the increased penetration of Renewable Energy Sources (RES) has decreased the power system inertia, resulting in the potential for more regular and greater amplitude underfrequency events. Furthermore, the intermittent nature of RES, alongside the fact these generation sources are mainly being integrated in to the distribution grid, creates problems in predicting the load associated with each UFLS step. Considering these challenges, E-REDES designed an algorithm and interface to monitor the UFLS scheme, allowing the simulation of each theoretical step operation for past and future load scenarios. The detailed approach enables a statistical analysis of UFLS scenarios, providing insights into key metrics such as assessing ENTSO-E targets and optimizing each step calculation criteria. This paper details the proposed methodology, the results of UFLS monitoring in Portugal and the major benefits derived from it. The authors believe it allows for a more flexible and proactive monitoring of the UFLS scheme, improving TSO/DSO coordination in this topic.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.823

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET conference proceedings.Same topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207