MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1517489439 · doi:10.1109/cdc.1996.577262

On-line optimal reactive power flow by energy loss minimization

2002· article· en· W1517489439 on OpenAlexaff
S.S. Sharif, James Taylor, E.F. Hill

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimal Power Flow Distribution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMinificationAC powerVoltageEnergy minimizationEnergy (signal processing)Power (physics)Control theory (sociology)Computer scienceConstraint (computer-aided design)Line (geometry)Mathematical optimizationMathematicsEngineeringControl (management)Electrical engineeringStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A method for online application of optimal reactive power dispatch based on total energy loss minimization (ELM) is presented. In this approach the total energy loss from the present instant over the next hour is minimized. The method uses the load forecast during this period. All the continuous and discrete control variables are adjusted on an hourly basis. During the hour, any voltage constraint violations are removed by adjusting the VArs/voltages of generators every 15 minutes. A detailed study of a sample network is given. The ELM and power loss minimization (PLM) methods are compared by using the sample network. As seen in simulation results, the voltage profile from the ELM method is more satisfactory than that from the PLM method. In addition, the total energy loss during the specified hour which is found from the ELM method is lower than that from the PLM method. Finally, the proposed method is more likely to find feasible solutions, while the PLM method can have difficulty doing so.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptimal Power Flow DistributionFrench-language works237,207