Learning power and language expressiveness

The topic of the present work is to study the relationship between the power of the learning algorithms on the one hand, and the expressive power of the logical language which is used to represent the problems to be learned on the other hand. The central question is whether enriching the language results in more learning power. In order to make the question relevant and nontrivial, it is required that both texts (sequences of data) and hypotheses (guesses) be translatable from the “rich” language into the “poor” one. The issue is considered for several logical languages suitable to describe structures whose domain is the set of natural numbers. It is shown that enriching the language does not give any advantage for those languages which define a monadic second-order language being decidable in the following sense: there is a fixed interpretation in the structure of natural numbers such that the set of sentences of this extended language true in that structure is decidable. But enriching the original language even by only one constant gives an advantage if this language contains a binary function symbol (which will be interpreted as addition). Furthermore, it is shown that behaviourally correct learning has exactly the same power as learning in the limit for those languages which define a monadic second-order language with the property given above, but has more power in case of languages containing a binary function symbol. Adding the natural requirement that the set of all structures to be learned is recursively enumerable, it is shown that it pays o6 to enrich the language of arithmetics for both finite learning and learning in the limit, but it does not pay off to enrich the language for behaviourally correct learning.

Torsional Interaction Studies on a Power System Compensated by SSSC and Fixed Capacitor

In this paper, a static synchronous series compensator (SSSC), along with a fixed capacitor, is used to avoid torsional mode instability in a series compensated transmission system. A 48-step harmonic neutralized inverter is used for the realization of the SSSC. The system under consideration is the IEEE first benchmark model on SSR analysis. The system stability is studied both through eigenvalue analysis and EMTDC/PSCAD simulation studies. It is shown that the combination of the SSSC and the fixed capacitor improves the synchronizing power coefficient. The presence of the fixed capacitor ensures increased damping of small signal oscillations. At higher levels of fixed capacitor compensation, a damping controller is required to stabilize the torsional modes of SSR.

TCSC control design for transient stability improvement of a multi-machine power system using trajectory sensitivity

This paper discusses the effects of thyristor controlled series compensator (TCSC), a series FACTS controller, on the transient stability of a power system. Trajectory sensitivity analysis (TSA) has been used to measure the transient stability condition of the system. The TCSC is modeled by a variable capacitor, the value of which changes with the firing angle. It is shown that TSA can be used in the design of the controller. The optimal locations of the TCSC-controller for different fault conditions can also be identified with the help of TSA. The paper depicts the advantage of the use of TCSC with a suitable controller over fixed capacitor operation.

Performance study of two different compensating devices in a custom power park

Simulation study of a custom power park (CPP) is presented. It is assumed that the park contains unbalanced and nonlinear loads in addition to a sensitive load. Two different types of compensators are used separately to protect the sensitive load against unbalance and distortion caused by the other loads. It has been shown that a shunt compensator can regulate the voltage of the CPP bus, whereas the series compensator can only regulate the sensitive load terminal voltage. Additional issues such as the load transfer through a static transfer switch, detection of sag/fault etc. are also discussed. The concepts are validated through PSCAD/EMTDC simulation studies on a sample distribution system.

The constitutional power to make war: domestic legal issues raised by Australia's action in Iraq

The legal power to declare war has traditionally been a part of a prerogative to be exercised solely on advice that passed from the King to the Governor-General no later than 1942. In 2003, the Governor- General was not involved in the decision by the Prime Minister and Cabinet to commit Australian troops to the invasion of Iraq. The authors explore the alternative legal means by which Australia can go to war - means the government in fact used in 2003 - and the constitutional basis of those means. While the prerogative power can be regulated and/or devolved by legislation, and just possibly by practice, there does not seem to be a sound legal basis to assert that the power has been devolved to any other person. It appears that in 2003 the Defence Minister used his legal powers under the Defence Act 1903 (Cth) (as amended in 1975) to give instructions to the service head(s). A powerful argument could be made that the relevant sections of the Defence Act were not intended to be used for the decision to go to war, and that such instructions are for peacetime or in bello decisions. If so, the power to make war remains within the prerogative to be exercised on advice. Interviews with the then Governor-General indicate that Prime Minister Howard had planned to take the matter to the Federal Executive Council 'for noting', but did not do so after the Governor-General sought the views of the then Attorney-General about relevant issues of international law. The exchange raises many issues, but those of interest concern the kinds of questions the Governor-General could and should ask about proposed international action and whether they in any way mirror the assurances that are uncontroversially required for domestic action. In 2003, the Governor-General's scrutiny was the only independent scrutiny available because the legality of the decision to go to war was not a matter that could be determined in the High Court, and the federal government had taken action in March 2002 that effectively prevented the matter coming before the International Court of Justice