MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2327168173 · doi:10.1109/jsyst.2014.2349357

Online Intelligent Demand Management of Plug-In Electric Vehicles in Future Smart Parking Lots

2015· article· en· W2327168173 on OpenAlexaff
E. Akhavan-Rezai, Mostafa F. Shaaban, Ehab F. El‐Saadany, Fakhri Karray

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Systems Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmart gridPlug-inComputer scienceDuration (music)Fuzzy logicElectric vehicleInteger programmingEnergy managementLinear programmingEnergy (signal processing)Mathematical optimizationOperations researchEngineeringArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmElectrical engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes an online intelligent demand coordination of plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) in distribution systems. The proposed method is based on the assignment of scores to PEVs through a fuzzy expert system. As well, without violation of grid operational constraints, the PEVs are optimally charged in order to maximize the owners' satisfaction in terms of the energy delivered. The optimization problem of online PEV charging is defined as mixed-integer nonlinear programming. Simulation on a typical distribution network proves the effectiveness of the proposed methodology. Results of the analysis indicate that for more critical PEVs, which have shorter parking duration and higher required charging time, the proposed solution outperforms in more robust energy delivery to the PEV and, accordingly, more satisfaction for the owner.

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)0.001
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations117
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Systems JournalSame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207