Thermo-Electric Co-Simulation on Geographically Distributed Real-Time Simulators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we report a combined electrical and thermal simulation carried out using two real-time digital simulators located approximately 3500 km from each other. The electrical model was developed on the RTDS simulator at the Center for Advanced Power Systems, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, while the thermal model was developed on an OPAL-RT simulator located in the RTX-Lab at the University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta. The two simulators exchange data in an asynchronous mode on the Internet utilizing the TCP/IP and UDP protocols. Before running the actual thermo-electric co-simulation, a loop-back test was designed and run to investigate the accuracy, latency, and stability of the communication link. The loop-back test revealed a maximum latency of 0.1s for transmitting a signal from one simulator to the other including all the communication and processing delays. Simulation results corroborate the fact that despite this latency, the thermo-electric co-simulation on geographically distributed real-time simulators can be performed with sufficient accuracy and stability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".