MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135780274 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2007.327

A Novel Discrete Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm for Optimal Capacitor Placement and Sizing

2007· article· en· W2135780274 on OpenAlexaff
M. F. AlHajri, M. R. AlRashidi, M.E. El-Hawary

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimal Power Flow Distribution
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapacitorParticle swarm optimizationSizingRobustness (evolution)VoltageAC powerComputer scienceMathematical optimizationElectric power systemDecoupling capacitorAlgorithmPower (physics)EngineeringMathematicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Voltage profiles throughout the electric power system network have to be kept at acceptable levels to ensure network reliability among other issues. Capacitor banks are commonly installed in various parts of the electric grid to maintain voltage levels within proper limits. In general, feeders in distribution systems include the majority of shunt capacitors installations to boost up voltage levels. In this paper, a novel approach is proposed to optimally solve the problem of determining the location and size of shunt capacitors in distribution systems. Traditionally, the problem is usually solved in two steps; first by determining the location of the "needed" bus and then selecting the proper size. The proposed method solves the problems of finding the optimal capacitor size and location simultaneously. Throughout the optimization process, both the capacitor injected reactive power and its location are being treated as discrete variables. The objective function considered in this paper is to minimize the total feeder losses. The proposed algorithm was tested on a standard test system. Results signify the robustness of the proposed algorithm in solving this difficult integer programming 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations27
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptimal Power Flow DistributionFrench-language works237,207