MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152974989 · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2002.1007890

Development of a hybrid model for electrical power spot prices

2002· article· en· W2152974989 on OpenAlexaff
Matt Davison, C. Lindsay Anderson, Bernd Marcus, Kate Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Systems · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Power System Optimization
Canadian institutionsActuaWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpot contractElectricityElectricity marketElectricity priceEconomicsEconometricsStochastic modellingElectricity pricingForward contractElectricity generationElectric power systemElectric powerForward priceComputer scienceMicroeconomicsPower (physics)Financial economicsEngineeringElectrical engineeringFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A great deal of interest has been paid to the market-based pricing of electrical power. Electrical power contracts often contain embedded options, the valuations of which require a stochastic model for electricity prices. Successful stochastic models exist for modeling price variations in traditional commodities. Electricity is critically different from these commodities as it is difficult to store and, on short time scales, its price is highly inelastic. This has important implications for stochastic spot price models of electricity. Several stochastic models of electricity spot prices already exist. In these random models, price returns play a dominant role. In this paper, we lead a guided tour through existing electricity price data to motivate a new stochastic electricity price model different in that it directly models price. We apply the new model to the problem of pricing options on electrical power and discuss these preliminary results.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations97
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power SystemsSame topicElectric Power System OptimizationFrench-language works237,207