MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098153837 · doi:10.1109/tdc.2004.1432514

Resource adequacy assessment considering transmission and generation via market simulations

2005· article· en· W2098153837 on OpenAlexaff
Huawei Chao, Fangxing Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsABB (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnavailabilityReliability (semiconductor)Transmission (telecommunications)Electricity marketResource (disambiguation)Computer scienceReliability engineeringEnvironmental economicsTransmission systemElectric power systemInvestment (military)Energy marketElectricityPower (physics)TelecommunicationsEngineeringEconomicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Growth in electricity demand with lack of investment in new transmission facilities has led to the formation of load pockets with long congestion hours over transmission bottlenecks. When assessing resource adequacy with reference to the load pockets, one needs to include both generation resources and power delivery systems to capture their impacts on system reliability and market economics at the delivery points. This paper presents a resource adequacy analysis approach to evaluate reliability as well as economic impact in a competitive energy market. Unavailability of generating units and transmission facilities is considered in market simulations to assess the overall adequacy of load-serving ability in a load pocket. Effects of transmission are illustrated through a market simulation analysis of the NYCA system based on publicly available transmission, generation, and demand data.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207