MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2507553941 · doi:10.1109/tsipn.2016.2607123

Optimal Power Allocation for Hybrid Energy Harvesting and Power Grid Coexisting System With Power Upper Bounded Constraints

2016· article· en· W2507553941 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Signal and Information Processing over Networks · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical optimizationComputer sciencePower (physics)Convex optimizationGridEnergy harvestingElectric power systemEnergy (signal processing)Power budgetMathematicsRegular polygon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As one of the green energy resources, the technique of energy harvesting harnesses energy from its surrounding environment. In this setting, a power grid is also utilized to serve as a supplementary source to regulate the not-so-stable harvested energy supply of the system. The power allocated to the user(s) from the sum of the harvested energy and the power grid is subject to peak power constraints. The background of these constraints comes from field requirements, such as avoiding the saturation of power allocated to the user(s), avoiding system level out-of-band power leakage, and reducing interference with other transmitter(s) due to the nonlinearity generated via the transmitting mechanisms to the user(s). The proposed problem considers simultaneously 1) the hybrid paradigm of both energy harvesting and grid power supplies, and 2) the peak power constraints in such systems. For our proposed problem, the most efficient known-to-date and popular convex optimization method of primal-dual interior method (PD-IPM) only computes an € solution, not an optimal solution, even with more computations. The novelty of the proposed algorithms is that they compute the exact solutions with the low degree polynomial computational complexity. To the best of the authors' knowledge, under the same assumptions, no prior publication, including PD-IPM, can arrive at such results. Numerical examples also illustrate efficiency of the proposed algorithms.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 communication0.0000.003
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.180 · 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