MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2496234200 · doi:10.1109/tsg.2016.2596098

Voltage Regulation in Islanded Microgrids Using Distributed Constraint Satisfaction

2016· article· en· W2496234200 on OpenAlexafffund
Nader A. El-Taweel, Hany E. Z. Farag

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Smart Grid · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVoltage droopVoltage regulationControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceController (irrigation)Distributed generationVoltageAsynchronous communicationVoltage dropVoltage regulatorEngineeringDistributed computingControl (management)Computer networkElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Droop control is a key control method for operating islanded microgrids (IMGs). The settings of the droop parameters for distributed generation (DG) units can considerably affect the ability of an IMG to satisfy the required voltage tolerance boundary prescribed in steady-state voltage regulation standards. This paper analyzes the complexity of voltage regulations in droop-controlled IMGs. A new algorithm is proposed to satisfy the voltage regulation requirements of IMGs. The proposed algorithm obviates the need for a centralized secondary controller, where each DG unit updates its own voltage droop parameters, autonomously, via interaction with other DG units, using a low-bandwidth, peer-to-peer communication network. To that end, a distributed constraint satisfaction approach is adopted to formulate the problem of voltage regulation in a multi-agent environment. An asynchronous weak commitment technique is proposed to solve the formulated problem. Several case studies are simulated to evaluate the performance of the proposed algorithm. The results show that the proposed algorithm can effectively mitigate the challenges of voltage regulation in IMG systems.

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)0.003
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations25
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Smart GridSame topicMicrogrid Control and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207