1. This paper analyzes the performance of low earth orbit (LEO) satellites based communication services for power system monitoring and supervision.
2. An experimental test bed was used to evaluate the connection time, degradation of service, and data latency for packet and asynchronous data services.
3. The results show that LEO satellites based communication technologies have a set of intrinsic advantages that could be useful in power system communication.
This article provides an analysis of the performance of low earth orbit (LEO) satellites based communication services for power system monitoring and supervision. The article is well-structured and provides a comprehensive overview of the topic, including a comparative analysis between different satellite service providers, an explanation of the experimental test bed used to assess the performance of LEOs based data services, and a discussion of the experimental results.
The article is generally reliable and trustworthy, as it provides evidence to support its claims in the form of references to other works in the field as well as detailed descriptions of its own experiments. However, there are some potential biases present in the article which should be noted. For example, while it does provide a comparison between different satellite service providers, it only focuses on one particular provider – Globalstar® – which may lead to an overly positive view on their services compared to other providers. Additionally, while it does mention possible risks associated with using satellite-based technologies for power system communication, these risks are not explored in detail or discussed further.
In terms of missing points or evidence for claims made, there is some information missing from certain sections such as Section 4 which describes the main features of the experimental test bed but does not provide any details about how this test bed was constructed or what specific measurements were taken during testing. Additionally, while counterarguments are mentioned briefly in Section 2 when discussing related works in this field, they are not explored further or discussed in detail throughout the rest of the article.
In conclusion, this article is generally reliable and trustworthy but there are some potential biases present which should be noted when considering its content. Additionally, there are some missing points or evidence for claims made which could be addressed by providing more detailed information about certain aspects such as how exactly the experimental test bed was constructed and what specific measurements were taken during testing.