MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2589134274 · doi:10.20381/ruor-238

Demand Response in the Ontario Electricity Market

2016· article· en· W2589134274 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Darren Gresch

Bibliographic record

VenueuO Research (University of Ottawa) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Power System Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemand responseElectricity marketElectricityBusinessEconomicsIndustrial organizationEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to address the issue of climate change, our energy systems need to incorporate higher percentages of renewable energy generation. There are, however, unique challenges associated with this task. Although the marginal cost of renewable energy sources is at or near zero, renewables introduce a level of variability into the supply of electricity that is forcing electricity system operators to become more sophisticated in how they operate the electricity system. By more actively managing the demand for electricity through what is called demand response, some of the increased variability in the electricity supply due to higher percentages of renewables might be effectively mitigated by decreasing the variability in the demand for electricity. While various forms of demand response have existed for decades, technological improvements are increasing the usefulness and amount of demand response available to grid operators. This paper models Ontario’s electricity market for the year of 2014 and examines the effect of demand response at various levels of wind penetration in the electricity supply mix. The inclusion of demand response into the model introduces cost savings over the case with no demand response. Demand response decreases the need for conventional peaking sources and reduces the amount of excess electricity generation, making it easier for grid operators to incorporate a higher penetration of renewable energy sources.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.336
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueuO Research (University of Ottawa)Same topicElectric Power System OptimizationFrench-language works237,207