MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127297430 · doi:10.1109/jsac.2015.2481212

Real-Time Energy Storage Management With Renewable Integration: Finite-Time Horizon Approach

2015· article· en· W2127297430 on OpenAlexaff
Tianyi Li, Min Dong

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMathematical optimizationLyapunov optimizationTime horizonRenewable energyOptimization problemDynamic programmingEnergy managementSystem dynamicsLyapunov functionEnergy (signal processing)Lyapunov equationNonlinear systemAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider the design of cost-effective management of energy storage with renewable integration for load supply. We take a finite time horizon approach and formulate the control optimization problem aimed at minimizing the system cost over a fixed time period. Recognizing the unpredictable and nonstationary stochastic nature of system dynamics, we assume unknown arbitrary dynamics of renewable generation, load, and electricity pricing in formulating our problem. Furthermore, we incorporate detailed battery operation cost into the system cost. Different from the infinite time horizon problems in existing works, the coupling of control decisions over time, due to finite battery capacity, is more challenging to manage. We develop a special technique to tackle the technical challenges in solving the problem. Through problem modification and transformation, we are able to apply Lyapunov optimization to design a real-time control algorithm that relies only on the current system dynamics. The proposed control solution has a closed-form expression and thus is simple to implement. Through analysis, the proposed algorithm is shown to have a bounded performance gap to the optimal noncausal T-slot lookahead control policy. Simulation studies show the effectiveness of our proposed algorithm as compared with two alternative real-time and noncausal algorithms.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.227
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations35
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal on Selected Areas in CommunicationsSame topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207