MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319929898 · doi:10.1109/tsg.2016.2530660

Robust Frequency Regulation Capacity Scheduling Algorithm for Electric Vehicles

2016· article· en· W2319929898 on OpenAlexaff
Enxin Yao, Vincent W. S. Wong, Robert Schober

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Smart Grid · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutomatic Generation ControlDemand responseComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)Automatic frequency controlScheduling (production processes)Electric power systemCompensation (psychology)Control theory (sociology)EngineeringMathematical optimizationPower (physics)TelecommunicationsElectricityControl (management)Electrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electric vehicles (EVs) have the potential to provide frequency regulation service to an independent system operator (ISO) by changing their real-time charging or discharging power according to an automatic generation control (AGC) signal. Recently, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has issued Order 755 to ISOs to introduce a performance-based compensation scheme in the frequency regulation market. The goal is to provide economic incentives for fast ramping resources such as EVs to participate in the market. In this paper, we model the EV frequency regulation service under the performance-based compensation scheme. Thereby, a robust optimization framework is adopted for the formulation of a frequency regulation capacity scheduling problem. Our problem formulation takes into account the performance-based compensation scheme, the random AGC signal, and the dynamic arrival and departure times of the EVs. We propose an efficient algorithm to solve the formulated problem. Simulation results show that the proposed algorithm improves the revenue under the performance-based compensation scheme compared with a benchmark algorithm.

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)0.002
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations151
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Smart GridSame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207