MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2617362425 · doi:10.1049/iet-est.2017.0007

EVs for frequency regulation: cost benefit analysis in a smart grid environment

2017· article· en· W2617362425 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

VenueIET Electrical Systems in Transportation · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGridVehicle-to-gridSmart gridBattery (electricity)Service (business)Automotive engineeringReliability engineeringFrequency gridElectric power systemLevellingEngineeringComputer scienceElectric vehiclePower (physics)Electrical engineeringVoltageBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vehicle‐to‐grid systems facilitate efficient and reliable integration of electric vehicle (EV) into the smart grid. This integration helps provide various services such as peak load levelling, frequency regulation (FR) and other ancillary services that provide notable benefits to utilities. In addition to the benefits to the utilities, EV owners may also benefit from providing these ancillary services to the grid. In this study, a comprehensive assessment of the economic benefits of using EVs to support FR service to the power grid is developed. The limitations for providing such services to the grid are evaluated. The number of the charge and discharge cycles of the EV battery is estimated based on a realistic semi‐logarithmic model. Finally, the estimates are used to calculate the battery degradation cost for providing FR and estimate the safe amount of power that EVs can supply with adequate consideration for daily driving requirements.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.655

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.204 · 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