MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009993860 · doi:10.1109/tsg.2015.2399232

Reactive Power Sharing in Islanded Microgrids Using Adaptive Voltage Droop Control

2015· article· en· W2009993860 on OpenAlexafffund
Hisham Mahmood, Dennis Michaelson, Jin Jiang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Smart Grid · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVoltage droopMicrogridControl theory (sociology)Controller (irrigation)Voltage regulationAC powerVoltageInverterEngineeringComputer scienceVoltage regulatorControl (management)Electrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a strategy that employs an adaptive voltage droop control to achieve accurate reactive power sharing is investigated. Instead of controlling the output voltage of the inverter directly, the voltage droop slope is tuned to compensate for the mismatch in the voltage drops across feeders by using communication links. If the communication channel is disrupted, the controller will operate with the last tuned droop coefficient, which is shown to still outperform the controller with the initial fixed droop coefficient. Also, the net control action of the adaptive droop terms is demonstrated to have a negligible effect on the microgrid bus voltage. Since communication is not used within the tuning control loop, the strategy is inherently immune to delays in communication links. A small-signal model of the proposed controller is presented, and the effectiveness of the proposed strategy is demonstrated on a 1.2 kVA prototype microgrid.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations184
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Smart GridSame topicMicrogrid Control and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207