Load-flow algorithm of radial distribution networks incorporating composite load model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".