MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2128378447 · doi:10.1109/pes.2007.385504

Secondary Reserve Dispatch Accounting for Wind Power Randomness and Spillage

2007· article· en· W2128378447 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Power System Optimization
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWind powerReserve requirementSpillageBiddingElectric power systemComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Probabilistic logicReliability engineeringOperations researchPower system simulationRandomnessPower (physics)EngineeringElectrical engineeringOperations managementBusinessEconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The joint operation of wind energy and traditional power plants has brought new challenges to the operation of power systems. In particular, reserve scheduling may need to be modified in order to accommodate increasing levels of intermittent and random wind power. In this panel we discuss some of the issues and possible solutions regarding reserve considering the wind power characteristics. Specifically, we will outline a methodology to include secondary reserve requirements in the day-ahead operations planning as a set of probabilistic constraints.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.284
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.199 · 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