Multi-objective Optimization for Design and Operation of Distributed Energy Systems through the Multi-energy Hub Network Approach
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A generic framework is developed to study the application of energy hubs and its related network model to demonstrate the optimal design and operation of distributed energy systems (DESs) in urban areas. A novel multi-objective approach based on augmented epsilon constraint technique is employed to carry out this work. As an illustrative example, the proposed model is applied to an urban area in Ontario, Canada. Different scenarios are defined to investigate the effect of energy storage systems and energy exchange within a network on the optimal configuration and operation of the system. Moreover, multi-objective optimization is carried out based on two conflicting objectives, namely, total annual cost and greenhouse gas emission. The findings show that the simultaneous consideration of DESs, storage technologies, and a network of energy exchange between hubs (scenario 4) results in the installation of more DESs and at least 8% reduction of annual cost when compared to other scenarios. Furthermore, lowering the electricity grid emission factor results in higher adoption of renewable energy generation based DESs rather than natural gas based DESs. The sensitivity analysis shows that doubling the electricity tariff rate results in 75% increase in cost, while the pricing of natural gas has no significant effect on overall cost. This demonstrates that the cost is more sensitive to the electricity tariff rate rather than natural gas price for this specific case study.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it