MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2543217909 · doi:10.1109/epecs.2015.7368491

Optimum planning of renewable energy resources in conjunction with battery energy storage systems

2015· article· en· W2543217909 on OpenAlexaff
Hany E. Z. Farag, Sarah M. Kandil

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimal Power Flow Distribution
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScheduleRenewable energyComputer scienceReliability engineeringEnergy storageOverhead (engineering)Software deploymentBattery (electricity)Mathematical optimizationPower (physics)EngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The immense deployment of renewable energy resources (RES) have gained significant interest in distribution networks, which creates great challenges for distribution network planners and operators. One way of mitigating such challenges is to combine the integration of RES with energy storage systems (ESS). However, appropriate combination of both RES and ESS requires new planning methodologies in distribution networks that take into account the special features and characteristics of such new resources i.e. RES and ESS. To that end, this paper presents a new algorithm for optimum planning of RES in conjunction with Battery ESS (BESS) in distribution networks. The objective of the proposed planning algorithm aims to minimize the overall capital and operational costs. The proposed formulation of the planning problem takes into account the implementation of smart inverters control to optimally schedule the active and reactive power outputs of RES and BESS units. Further, several technical constraints are taken into consideration, including maximum reverse power at the substation, maximum number of RES connections, voltage technical limits, and thermal limits of cables and overhead lines. The formulated problem has been solved using a combination between metaheuristic technique and deterministic technique. Several case studies have been carried out to test the effectiveness of the proposed planning methodology.

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)0.000
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptimal Power Flow DistributionFrench-language works237,207