MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Physically based Load Model of Residential Electric Thermal Storage: Application to LM Programs

2004· article· en· W2029692759 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Á. Molina, Antonio Gabaldón, Carlos Álvarez-Bel, J.A. Fuentes

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Power and Energy Systems · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBuilding Energy and Comfort Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)Cooling loadThermal massComputer scienceDemand responseThermal energy storageLoad managementPeak demandElectrical loadEnvironmental sciencePeak loadSimulationAutomotive engineeringThermalEngineeringElectrical engineeringMechanical engineeringAir conditioningElectricityMeteorologyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes and assesses a physically based load model of residential Electric Thermal Storage (ETS) devices, for both static and dynamic loads. This load model is based on an energy balance between the indoor environment, the dwelling constructive parameters, the ETS device, and the internal mass through a discrete state-space equation system. Therefore, detailed information about several physical magnitudes of the whole system are given along the time: ceramic brick temperature, electrical demand, heat fluxes, and indoor temperature. The main application of this load model has been oriented towards the simulation of the ETS device performances, in order to assess load management (LM) programs. The proposed model has been implemented and validated using data collected for the last two years in residential areas, in order to evaluate its accuracy and flexibility. Finally, a simulation case study is presented to show the possibilities of limiting and reducing the actual winter-peak by means of an LM program, proposed by the authors, that takes into account customer minimum comfort levels and the experimental data of residential load curve profiles. Key Words Electric thermal storage, residential heating, load models, demand side, sustainable development 1.

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)0.001
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations9
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Power and Energy SystemsSame topicBuilding Energy and Comfort OptimizationFrench-language works237,207