MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110528197 · doi:10.1109/pes.2007.385517

Dispatchable Distributed Generation Network - A New Concept to Advance DG Technologies

2007· article· en· W2110528197 on OpenAlexaff
Yaosuo Xue, Liuchen Chang, Julian Meng

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDispatchable generationComputer scienceDistributed computingDistributed generationEngineeringElectrical engineeringRenewable energy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Renewable energy has been booming globally thanks to its economic, social, and environmental benefits. However, small distributed generation (DG) systems using renewable energy have not yet achieved a significant level of penetration. With deregulation of electricity market, policies have been available to facilitate interconnection of small distributed generators (DGs) with electric grids. However, dispatchability and reliability still present technical barriers for small DGs to play a significant role in the open market, thus limiting their ability to provide value-added services. This paper presents a new concept to enhance the dispatchability of DGs through an aggregated DG network. Dispersed DGs with different energy resources, such as wind turbines, photovoltaics, small hydros, fuel cells, and microturbines, are integrated into a single aggregated generating plant via open power transmission networks. Traditional SCADA dedicated optical fibers, copper and other dedicated wireless physical layers can be replaced by Internet access and low-cost point-to-point wireless communication links to reduce infrastructure costs. The aggregated power generation is balanced between firm DGs and intermittent DGs to allow for the required dispatchability. Day-ahead and hourly generation scheduling can be committed in wholesale electricity trading, thereby achieving the desired added economic benefits. This is usually more favorable than being credited at the avoided cost as seen by utilities with traditional individual DGs.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations21
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Power Engineering Society General MeetingSame topicMicrogrid Control and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207