MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030343799 · doi:10.1109/tsg.2011.2177103

A Water-Filling Based Scheduling Algorithm for the Smart Grid

2012· article· en· W2030343799 on OpenAlexaff
Merwais Shinwari, Amr Youssef, Walaa Hamouda

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Smart Grid · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Smart gridGridDistributed computingComputationDemand responsePower consumptionFair-share schedulingReal-time computingElectricityMathematical optimizationComputer networkPower (physics)AlgorithmEngineeringQuality of service

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The processing and communication capabilities of the smart grid provide a solid foundation for enhancing its efficiency and reliability. These capabilities allow utility companies to adjust their offerings in a way that encourages consumers to reduce their peak hour consumption, resulting in a more efficient system. In this paper, we propose a method for scheduling a community's power consumption such that it becomes almost flat. Our methodology utilizes distributed schedulers that allocate time slots to soft loads probabilistically based on precalculated and predistributed demand forecast information. This approach requires no communication or coordination between scheduling nodes. Furthermore, the computation performed at each scheduling node is minimal. Obtaining a relatively constant consumption makes it possible to have a relatively constant billing rate and eliminates operational inefficiencies. We also analyze the fairness of our proposed approach, the effect of the possible errors in the demand forecast, and the participation incentives for consumers.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations102
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Smart GridSame topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207