MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167885813 · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2003.818587

An Electricity Market With a Probabilistic Spinning Reserve Criterion

2004· article· en· W2167885813 on OpenAlexaff
François Bouffard, F.D. Galiana

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Systems · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbabilistic logicClearingReliability (semiconductor)Mathematical optimizationElectricity marketMarket clearingElectric power systemPower system simulationComputationComputer scienceElectricityReliability engineeringMathematicsEngineeringPower (physics)AlgorithmEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the problem of reliability-constrained market-clearing in pool-based electricity markets with unit commitment. In general, probabilistic reliability criteria that implicitly set the reserve requirement are defined by the loss-of-load probability and by the expected load not served. As the computation of such metrics is complicated by their nonlinear and combinatorial nature, we introduce the notion of hybrid metrics based on the probabilities of loss-of-load due to single and double generation outages only. The reliability-constrained market-clearing problem can then be formulated as a mixed-integer linear program and solved with large-scale commercial solvers. Numerical tests with data from the IEEE Reliability Test System indicate that the new method is computationally efficient and produces market-clearing results with the desired probabilistic characteristics.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations269
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power SystemsSame topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207