MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1821888196

Reliability Cost/Worth Associated With Wind Energy and Energy Storage Utilization in Electric Power Systems

2008· article· en· W1821888196 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the 10th International Conference on Probablistic Methods Applied to Power Systems · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanManitoba Hydro
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability engineeringWind powerReliability (semiconductor)Energy storageIntermittent energy sourceElectric power systemEnergy (signal processing)Computer scienceRenewable energyPower (physics)EngineeringDistributed generationElectrical engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wind is being recognized as an encouraging and cost effective generation source both in large grid connected systems and small isolated applications. The actual benefits obtained from utilizing wind energy for electric power generation can be investigated using reliability and economic evaluation techniques. The focus of these techniques is usually directed to the areas of reliability and the investment/operation alternatives associated with determining a desired reliability level. Considerable effort has been devoted to the reliability evaluation of power systems utilizing wind energy. Comparatively less emphasis has been given to the related economic analyses of such systems particularly considering possible energy storage capability. This paper presents a reliability cost/worth evaluation method that can incorporate the impacts of wind energy and energy storage utilization in electric power systems.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.928
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.229 · 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