MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140242606 · doi:10.1139/l05-030

Stochastic control for risk under deregulated electricity market — a case study using a new formulation

2005· article· en· W2140242606 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Joyce Li Zhang, K. Ponnambalam

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWater resources management and optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInflowStochastic programmingMathematical optimizationMinificationComputer scienceDiscretizationStochastic optimizationStochastic controlDynamic programmingHydropowerElectricity marketState variableRisk managementElectricityDual (grammatical number)Optimal controlMathematicsEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the implementation of a new solution approach — Fletcher-Ponnambalam model (FP) — for risk management in hydropower system under deregulated electricity market. The FP model is an explicit method developed for the first and second moments of the storage state distributions in terms of moments of the inflow distributions. This method provides statistical information on the nature of random behaviour of the system state variables without any discretization and hence suitable for multi-reservoir problems. Also avoiding a scenario-based optimization makes it computationally inexpensive, as there is little growth to the size of the original problem. In this paper, the price uncertainty was introduced into the FP model in addition to the inflow uncertainty. Lake Nipigon reservoir system is chosen as the case study and FP results are compared with the stochastic dual dynamic programming (SDDP). Our studies indicate that the method could achieve optimum operations, considering risk minimization as one of the objectives in optimization.Key words: reservoir operations, explicit method, uncertainty, stochastic programming, risk.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.946

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicWater resources management and optimizationFrench-language works237,207