MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029577040 · doi:10.1080/15435075.2012.727364

Optimal Charging Control for Plug-in Electric Vehicles in Smart Microgrids Fueled by Renewable Energy Sources

2013· article· en· W2029577040 on OpenAlexaff
Li Zhu, F. Richard Yu, Bin Ning, Tao Tang

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Green Energy · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenewable energyBattery (electricity)Service (business)Automotive engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringEnvironmental economicsPower (physics)Electrical engineeringBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a growing interest in plug-in electric vehicles (EVs). Charging EVs from smart microgrids fueled by renewable energy resources is becoming a popular green approach. Although some works have been done on renewable energy sources and EVs in smart microgrids, the stochastic characteristics and the dynamic interplay between these two important green solutions should be carefully considered. Furthermore, one of the important performance metrics, service availability for EVs, is largely ignored in the existing works. In this article, we study the charging policies in smart microgrids with EVs and renewable energy sources. We analyze service availability under different charging policies. Based on the renewable energy sources states, battery states, and the number of charging EVs, an optimal charging policy is obtained to maximize the energy utilization with service availability constraints. We formulate the optimal charging problem as a stochastic decision process. Maximizing the energy utilization with service availability constraints is the objective in our model. Extensive simulation results are presented. It is illustrated that the proposed scheme can significantly improve the service availability for EVs in microgrids fueled by renewable energy sources.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.269
Threshold uncertainty score0.781

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Green EnergySame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207