MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059443258 · doi:10.1109/systol.2013.6693926

A model predictive control approach for integrating a master generation unit in a microgrid

2013· article· en· W2059443258 on OpenAlexaff
Luis I. Minchala, Adriana Vargas‐Martínez, Youmin Zhang, Luis E. Garza-Castañón

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrogridModel predictive controlRobustness (evolution)Control engineeringFault toleranceFault detection and isolationComputer scienceMATLABEngineeringControl theory (sociology)ActuatorVoltageReliability engineeringControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a model-based fault-tolerant approach for designing a control strategy in order to integrate a diesel engine generator (DEG) as master generation unit, voltage and frequency leader, in an islanded microgrid configuration. The microgrid design is mainly composed of a hybrid wind-diesel-photovoltaic power system with a battery storage system (BSS). A model predictive control (MPC) scheme has been selected for this task, due to its flexibility and capability for handling constraints. Fault-tolerance is achieved in the DEG control system with the addition of a fault detection and diagnosis (FDD) module to the MPC structure, in order to reconfigure the control strategy when actuator faults in the DEG are present. Different operating conditions of the microgrid were simulated in order to test control robustness. Improved performance over a baseline controller, IEEE type 1 exciter, is achieved. Dynamic models of the microgrids components are presented and simulation results of the microgrid behavior in Matlab/Simulink <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">®</sup> .

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.169 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrogrid Control and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207