MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116385668 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2011.6030487

Short-term coordination of hydro-thermal systems with cascaded reservoirs using bacterial foraging algorithm

2011· article· en· W2116385668 on OpenAlexaff
I. A. Farhat, M.E. El-Hawary

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Power System Optimization
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForagingConvergence (economics)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceOptimization problemTerm (time)Nonlinear systemAlgorithmMathematicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A modified bacterial foraging algorithm (MBFA) is presented in this paper to solve the short-term generation coordination problem of hydro-thermal systems with multi-chain reservoirs. The short-term hydro-thermal coordination problem (STHTC) is a dynamic nonlinear large-scale optimization problem which requires solving unit commitment and economic power load dispatch problems. The original bacterial foraging algorithm (BFA) is a recently developed evolutionary optimization technique based on the foraging behavior of the E. coli bacteria. The BFA has been successfully employed to solve various optimization problems; however, for large-scale problems such as the STHTC problem, it shows poor convergence properties. To tackle this complex problem considering its high-dimensioned search space, critical improvements are introduced to the basic BFA. The chemotactic step is modified to decrease nonlinearly and dynamically in order to improve the convergence characteristics. A multi reservoir cascaded hydro-thermal generation system is employed to test the proposed algorithm and demonstrate its capability to tackle this complex problem.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.189 · 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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Power System OptimizationFrench-language works237,207