MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2537516281 · doi:10.1287/inte.2016.0863

Power System Operator in Mexico Reveals Millions in Savings by Updating Its Short-Term Thermal Unit Commitment Model

2016· article· en· W2537516281 on OpenAlexfundno aff
José L. Ceciliano-Meza, Juan Álvarez López, Armando De la Torre Sánchez, Rolando Nieva Gómez, Isaías Guillén Moya, Roberto Navarro Pérez, F. Martinez, César Torres Ruiz, Anselmo Sánchez Sánchez, Mehmet Bayram Yildirim

Bibliographic record

VenueINFORMS Journal on Applied Analytics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Power System Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsPower system simulationInteger programmingOperations researchOperator (biology)Lagrangian relaxationComputer scienceThermal power stationOperational planningProcess (computing)Mathematical optimizationTerm (time)Economic dispatchElectric power systemEngineeringPower (physics)EconomicsMathematicsOperating systemWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2013, Centro Nacional de Control de Energía (CENACE), which is Mexico’s power system operator, updated its short-term hydrothermal coordination planning (STHTCP) tool. CENACE utilized commercial software to solve mixed-integer programming models for the unit commitment and economic dispatch of thermal units, such as gas, coal-fired, and combined-cycle plants. In an earlier paper that we reference, authors of this paper describe the mathematical model for the thermal unit commitment (TUC) problem, which is a sub-problem in the STHTCP process. The new STHTCP tool, which uses a mixed-integer programming-based TUC approach, has enhanced the modeling and solution quality compared to the Lagrangian relaxation-based TUC approach. The new tool has improved CENACE’s operations for managing its existing infrastructure, including power stations and transmission lines, and establishing the marginal prices needed to make energy trades. From the beginning of 2013 to the end of 2014, CENACE saved $2.2 million annually, which it attributes to better management of its thermal units. Over 10 years, it anticipates that these savings will represent more than $20 million in total savings.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINFORMS Journal on Applied AnalyticsSame topicElectric Power System OptimizationFrench-language works237,207