Impacts of repair state residence time distributions in an electric power generating capacity adequacy assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary function of an electric power system is to satisfy the load requirement as economically as possible with an acceptable assurance of continuity and quality. A generating capacity adequacy evaluation involves the determination of the total system generation required to satisfy the load requirement. In these studies, a generating unit is usually represented by a two-state model in which the unit is either available or unavailable for service. These models are valid representations for base load units but do not adequately represent intermittent operating units used to meet peak load conditions. The two-state model for a base load unit has been extended to a four-state peaking unit model that is widely used in practice. The generating unit state residence time distributions in these models are assumed to be exponential in form in virtually all practical system studies. This may not be a valid assumption for the repair state in some situations. A sequential Monte Carlo simulation technique is utilized to incorporate Weibull distributed generating unit state residence times in the two-state and four-state models. The effects on the adequacy indices and the adequacy index distributions are illustrated by application to two practical test 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.
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 | 0.006 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".