MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156117786 · doi:10.1109/infcomw.2011.5928828

Stochastic unit commitment in smart grid communications

2011· article· en· W2156117786 on OpenAlexaff
Shengrong Bu, F. Richard Yu, Peter Liu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmart gridRenewable energyComputer sciencePower system simulationGridDistributed computingScheduling (production processes)Demand responseHidden Markov modelMathematical optimizationElectric power systemReal-time computingPower (physics)Electrical engineeringEngineeringElectricityArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is growing interest in renewable energy resources and smart grid. Since most renewable sources are highly intermittent, they can induce significan fluctuation on the supply side of the power grid. On the other hand, the use of smart meters and smart appliances in the smart grid can cause significan uncertainties on the demand side as well. Unit commitment scheduling of power generation systems is an important issue in smart grid communications to coordinate energy demand and generation. In this paper, we study the stochastic unit commitment problem in smart grid communications. Hidden Markov models (HMMs) are used for renewable energy resources. The stochastic power demand loads are modeled by a Markov-modulated Poisson process (MMPP). We show that, under reasonable conditions on the smart grid, structural results can be derived for the unit commit problem, which make the solution practically useful. Simulation results are presented to show the effectiveness of the proposed schemes.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations61
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207