Market efficiency and MW margin to voltage instability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several electricity markets were created in the last two decades by deregulation and restructuring vertically integrated utilities. In order to serve the best interest of participating entities, it is important to operate electricity markets at their maximum efficiency. In most cases, electricity markets were formed to operate on existing physical power systems that had evolved over several decades as vertically integrated utilities. Location of generating stations, large urban load centers and enabling transmission systems were unique to every power system and followed the ‘lay of the land’. Depending upon a power system layout, voltage stability and MW Margin to Voltage Instability (MMVI) are unique to it. While an electricity market is to be operated efficiently, its optimal generation schedule to supply energy through an electric power system has to be reliable and meet the strict standards including those that relate to MMVI. This work elicits the relationship between market efficiency and MMVI. To this end, a formulation and a solution algorithm are presented. Two contrasting 5-bus cases illustrate how the transmission system layout influences the relationship between MMVI and market efficiency. The IEEE 118-bus system is also used to illustrate this relationship.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".