MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070469578 · doi:10.1109/pesgm.2012.6345583

Uncoordinated charging impacts of electric vehicles on electric distribution grids: Normal and fast charging comparison

2012· article· en· W2070469578 on OpenAlexaffabout
E. Akhavan-Rezai, Mostafa F. Shaaban, Ehab F. El‐Saadany, Aboelsood Zidan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistribution gridAutomotive engineeringGridPlug-inPenetration (warfare)Electric vehicleVoltagePower gridEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceElectrical engineeringPower (physics)EngineeringPhysicsMathematicsOperations research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) have uncertain penetration in electric grids due to uncertainties in charging and discharging patterns. This uncertainty together with various driving habits makes it difficult to accurately assess the effects on local distribution network. Extra electrical loads due uncoordinated charging of electric vehicles have different impacts on the local distribution grid. This paper proposes a method to evaluate the impacts of uncoordinated PEVs charging on the distribution grid during peak period. Two PEVs charging scenarios are studied, including normal and fast charging. The impact analysis is evaluated in terms of voltage violations, power losses and line loading, which is implemented on a real distribution system in Canada. The results of the analysis indicate that there are significant impacts on distribution networks due to PEVs charging, which limits the accommodation of desired penetration levels of PEVs.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations94
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207