MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560067836 · doi:10.1109/epec.2016.7771708

Effect of wind turbine parameters on optimal DG placement in power distribution systems

2016· article· en· W2560067836 on OpenAlexaff
Majed A. Alotaibi, Abdulaziz Almutairi, M.M.A. Salama

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimal Power Flow Distribution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWind powerTurbineSizingRenewable energyComputer scienceSmart gridPower (physics)Distributed generationReliability engineeringProbabilistic logicGridElectric power systemAutomotive engineeringControl theory (sociology)Control engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The notion of the “smart grid” has led stakeholders in the power industry to promote more efficient technologies to the network. Distribution systems are a favorite place to host most of these technologies including Renewable-based distributed generation (DG). Wind Turbine Generators (WTGs) in particular have proved their usefulness for supplying a fair portion of power demand; however, the power output of WTGs is mainly dependent on the stochastic nature of the site's wind speed in addition to the design parameters of WTGs. Furthermore, WTGs can only be suitably utilized when their capacities and locations are optimized in such a way to achieve certain goals. In this paper, the effect of wind generator design parameters, namely cut-in, cut-out, and rated wind speeds, on the problems of sizing and siting WTGs-based DGs is addressed. The probabilistic optimization model is used to minimize the system's annual energy losses, and the results reveal that the design parameters of WTGs must be carefully selected due to their strong effect on system losses and DG locations and capacities.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptimal Power Flow DistributionFrench-language works237,207