MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Challenges and Opportunities, the Future of Using Artificial Intelligence in the Use of Applications and Human Resources in Power Systems

2025· article· W4416924336 on OpenAlexaff
Abolfazl Babaei, Ali Nasr Esfahani, Armin Aghajani, Vahab Khoshdel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApplications of artificial intelligenceElectric power systemExpert systemIntelligent decision support systemPower (physics)Energy managementHuman resourcesControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, artificial intelligence (AI) has been developed in all areas of life due to its efficiency, precision, processing power, intelligence, and reliable stability. The purpose of AI is to facilitate human-like capabilities in learning, adaptation, and reasoning. As global energy demand continues to rise, the sustainability, management, and control of power systems have become increasingly important. Consequently, the use of intelligent methods and techniques to improve the reliability, protection, and load management of power systems is expanding. The purpose of this review paper is to investigate the challenges and opportunities of using AI in power systems, focusing on its impact on the software, platforms, and optimization patterns currently in use. Additionally, this paper will explore the effect of AI's foundation in power systems on human resource management development and the performance of employees in the power industry.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.010
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 topicSmart Grid Security and ResilienceFrench-language works237,207