MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149177425 · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2008.920718

Models for Quantifying the Economic Benefits of Distributed Generation

2008· article· en· W2149177425 on OpenAlexaff
Hugo A. Gil, G. Joós

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Systems · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimal Power Flow Distribution
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistributed generationEconomic dispatchDistributed power generationCost–benefit analysisEconomic impact analysisIndustrial organizationBusinessEnvironmental economicsComputer scienceEconomicsElectric power systemRisk analysis (engineering)Power (physics)MicroeconomicsEngineeringRenewable energy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine some of the most important economic benefits brought about by distributed generation technologies to the distribution utility and the power system. Models are developed that allow the quantification of those benefits in economic terms. In some cases, industry regulators or utilities charge connection fees to the owners of distributed generators, even if they are saving the local utility considerable amounts of money every year in deferred network upgrades, reduced losses, avoided wholesale market purchases and others. Efficient economic systems dictate that a proper share of the indirect benefits created by a given economic activity leads to overall optimal independent decision-making by its participants. Quantifying and allocating the benefits of distributed generation to the owners improves the economic performance of their investments and encourages the implementation of those distributed generation applications most valuable to the system.

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)0.005
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations192
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power SystemsSame topicOptimal Power Flow DistributionFrench-language works237,207