MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2624910259 · doi:10.6000/1929-7092.2017.06.25

Multi-Fuel Allocation for Power Generation Using Genetic Algorithms

2017· article· en· W2624910259 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anurak Choeichum, Narongdech Keeratipranon, Chaiyaporn Khemapatapan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Reviews on Global Economics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnergy and Environment Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenetic algorithmPower (physics)Computer scienceMathematical optimizationMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ever increasing growth of energy consumption has stimulated an energy crisis, not only in terms of energy demand, but also the impact of climate change from greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Renewable energy sources (RES) have high potential toward sustainable development, with a wide variety of socioeconomic benefits, including diversification of energy supply and creation of domestic industry. This paper presents a solution to optimal multi-fuel allocation for the electric power generation planning problem via genetic algorithms (GA). The objective is to maximize the electric power energy output and minimize generation cost. This is a difficult problem because of its data variation and volatility. GA can provide an appropriate heuristic search method and return an actual or near optimal solution. This paper uses some heuristics during crossover and mutation for tuning the system to obtain a better candidate solution. An experimental result showed significantly improved results compared with other techniques. The results in this paper should be useful for connecting power generation with economic growth.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Reviews on Global EconomicsSame topicEnergy and Environment ImpactsFrench-language works237,207