MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W184878530

Load-flow algorithm of radial distribution networks incorporating composite load model

2003· article· en· W184878530 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Power and Energy Systems · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimal Power Flow Distribution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvergence (economics)NumberingAlgorithmNode (physics)Computer scienceLoad balancing (electrical power)Mathematical optimizationElectrical networkControl theory (sociology)MathematicsEngineeringControl (management)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An efficient load-flow algorithm is required for automated distribution systems for operation and control and for planning and optimization. This article presents a robust load-flow algorithm for solving balanced radial distribution feeder. It solves simple algebraic recursive equation of receiving end voltage. Branch and node numbering techniques used do not require any specific training, and any arbitrary numbering scheme will lead to the solution by taking the same computer memory and computational time. In the algorithm, composite load model has been used because loads are voltage dependent in distribution systems. Load growth is also incorporated in the algorithm, as it is required by engineer for distribution systems expansion planning and operation. C++ program has been developed, and several power distribution networks have been successfully tested. The results are compared with those of other research and are found to be superior in terms of convergence and execution time, taking a lesser number of iterations. The proposed algorithm is found to have superior convergence pattern, and convergence is observed to be insensitive to type of load model, size of network, and R/X ratio of feeders. In the four different types of load models considered, the proposed algorithm took only four iterations to converge, whereas others have reported as high as seven iterations in the case of exponential load, and their convergence pattern varies with the load model.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.572

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.195 · 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