MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2165788516 · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2010.2068568

Robust Optimal Power Flow Solution Using Trust Region and Interior-Point Methods

2010· article· en· W2165788516 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Systems · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimal Power Flow Distribution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterior point methodMathematical optimizationPower flowTrust regionConvergence (economics)Nonlinear systemPoint (geometry)Electric power systemNorm (philosophy)Dual (grammatical number)Nonlinear programmingLocal convergenceComputer scienceMathematicsPower (physics)Control theory (sociology)Iterative method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A globally convergent optimization algorithm for solving large nonlinear optimal power flow (OPF) problems is presented. As power systems become heavily loaded, there is an increasing need for globally convergent OPF algorithms. By global convergence, one means the optimization algorithm being able to converge to an OPF solution, if at least one exists, for any choice of initial point. The globally convergent OPF presented is based on an infinity-norm trust region approach, using interior-point methods to solve the trust region subproblems. The performance of the proposed trust region interior-point OPF algorithm, when applied to the IEEE 30-, 57-, 118-, and 300-bus systems, and to an actual 1211-bus system, is compared with that of two widely used nonlinear interior-point methods, namely, a pure primal-dual and its predictor-corrector variant.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.840
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.234 · 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