ArticleHeliyon2024
Power line fault diagnosis based on convolutional neural networks.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With the rapid development of the national economy, power security is very important for the security of the country and people's happiness. Electricity is an important energy source for a country. Even if the power system malfunctions for a short period of time, it would cause incalculable losses to social production and people's lives. Among them, one of the most important reasons for power system faults is the occurrence of power line faults, so diagnosing faulty lines has great research significance. On the basis of analyzing the structure and working principle of the deep learning model convolutional neural network (CNN), this article used the CNN model to diagnose faults in power lines and analyzed the simulation results. It was found that different CNN structures have different fault diagnosis accuracy for power lines. The fewer the number of batches in the network structure and the more the number of training sessions, the higher its fault determination accuracy. In the power line fault diagnosis based on three deep learning algorithms, the CNN has the highest stable fault diagnosis accuracy of 100%; the recursive neural network has the second stable fault diagnosis accuracy of 93.4%; the deep belief network has the lowest stable fault diagnosis accuracy of 91.5%. In the comparison of power line fault diagnosis stability, the accuracy standard deviation of CNN is close to 0, and they are also the most stable in power circuit fault diagnosis. The stability of algorithmic recurrent neural networks is between the two, and the accuracy standard deviation of deep belief networks is 1.84% when trained 12 times. Their fault diagnosis stability is also the worst.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.