MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2017782626 · doi:10.1109/epec.2014.26

Experimental Validation of Wireless Load Sharing Method for Isolated AC Microgrids

2014· article· en· W2017782626 on OpenAlexafffund
Cristina Guzmán, Kodjo Agbossou, Alben Cardenas

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceTest benchSynchronization (alternating current)Automatic frequency controlVoltage sourceVoltageElectronic engineeringControl theory (sociology)Embedded systemEngineeringElectrical engineeringControl (management)Telecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The efficient integration of Distributed Generation (DG) systems, taking as main energy source the renewable energies is nowadays a great challenge. To integrate them into a whole power sharing system as a part of an autonomous micro grid, the Droops control is a local alternative to control the power interfaces such as voltage source inverters (VSI) in order to share the common load power and to supply frequency/voltage required by the load. The objective of this paper is the demonstration of a power sharing strategy achieved with a wireless master/slave load configuration. The strategy involves a Direct Droops (DDroops) control scheme for the master mode operation and an Inverse Droops (I-Droops) control scheme for the slave mode operation, this last following the frequency and the voltage imposed by the master VSI. The synchronization of VSIs, the signals estimation and the frequency tracking have been efficiently achieved using ADALINE network (Adaptive Linear Neuron). Experimental results using a real micro grid test bench with Field Programmable Gate Array embedded devices (FPGA) for the hardware implementation of each VSIs control demonstrate the validity of the strategy proposed.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.811
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrogrid Control and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207