MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171410554 · doi:10.1109/pesgm.2012.6345320

Optimal PHEV charging in coordination with distributed generation operation in distribution systems

2012· article· en· W2171410554 on OpenAlexaffabout
Omar Hafez, Kankar Bhattacharya

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRenewable energyGreenhouse gasEnvironmental economicsTariffDistributed generationPrivate transportEnvironmental scienceGlobal warmingAutomotive engineeringMarket penetrationElectric vehicleBusinessEnvironmental engineeringNatural resource economicsTransport engineeringEngineeringPower (physics)EconomicsClimate changeElectrical engineeringPublic transport

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increase in energy demand is one of the major challenges that utilities are faced with, which results in increase in environmental pollution and global warming. The transport sector has a significant share in the energy demand as well as environmental pollution. In Canada, almost 35% of the total energy demand is from the transport sector and it is the second largest source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The government of Ontario, Canada, has aimed to move toward a green energy economy, aimed towards increased penetration of renewable energy sources and Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle (PHEV) technology. In this paper, an optimal power flow (OPF) based optimization framework considering two different objectives, minimizing feeder losses and PHEV charging cost, are presented to understand the impact of PHEV charging on distribution networks. Three different charging periods are considered and the impact of the Ontario Time-of-Use (TOU) tariff on PHEV charging schedules is examined. The impact of PHEV charging on distribution systems in the presence of renewable energy sources is also discussed.

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 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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.211
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207