MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157212792 · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2003.810897

Multiobjective optimization for pricing system security in electricity markets

2003· article· en· W2157212792 on OpenAlexaff
Federico Milano, Claudio A. Cañizares, Marco Invernizzi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Systems · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimal Power Flow Distribution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiddingElectric power systemElectricity marketComputer scienceMathematical optimizationElectricityTransmission systemDatabase transactionTransmission (telecommunications)Reliability engineeringPower (physics)EconomicsEngineeringMicroeconomicsElectrical engineeringMathematicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a novel technique for representing system security in the operations of decentralized electricity markets, with special emphasis on voltage stability. An interior point method is used to solve the optimal power flow problem with a multiobjective function for maximizing both social benefit and the distance to maximum loading conditions. A six-bus system with both supply and demand-side bidding is used to illustrate the proposed technique for both elastic and inelastic demand, and a 129-bus test system that models the Italian HV transmission network is used for testing the practical applicability of the proposed method. The results obtained show that the proposed technique is able to improve system security while yielding better market conditions through increased transaction levels and improved locational marginal prices throughout 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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations179
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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