Design of an adaptive power system stabilizer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modern power networks are being driven ever closer to both their physical and operational limits. As a result, control systems are being increasingly relied on to assure satisfactory system performance. Power system stabilizers (PSSs) are one example of such controllers. Their purpose is to increase system damping and they are typically designed using a model of the network that is valid during nominal operating conditions. The limitation of this design approach is that during off-nominal operating conditions, such as those triggered by daily load fluctuations, performance of the controller can degrade.\n\nThe research presented in this report attempts to evaluate the possibility of employing an adaptive PSS as a means of avoiding the performance degradation precipitated by off-nominal operation. Conceptually, an adaptive PSS would be capable of identifying changes in the network and then adjusting its parameters to ensure suitable damping of the identified network. This work begins with a detailed look at the identification algorithm employed followed by a similarly detailed examination of the control algorithm that was used. The results of these two investigations are then combined to allow for a preliminary assessment of the performance that could be expected from an adaptive PSS.\n\nThe results of this research suggest that an adaptive PSS is a possibility but further work is needed to confirm this finding. Testing using more complex network models must be carried out, details pertaining to control parameter tuning must be resolved and closed-loop time domain simulations using the adaptive PSS design remain to be performed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".