MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2626828243 · doi:10.1109/icps.2017.7945123

Dynamic load modeling for industrial facilities using template and PSS/E composite load model structure CLOD

2017· article· en· W2626828243 on OpenAlexaff
Shengqiang Li, Xiaodong Liang, Wilsun Xu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Optimization and Stability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaMemorial University of NewfoundlandPowertech Labs (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobustness (evolution)Sensitivity (control systems)Computer scienceAutomotive engineeringReliability engineeringEngineeringElectronic engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Industrial facility loads have significant impact on power system stability. Due to their large power demand and complicated impact on system dynamic performance, it is critical to model them properly. Because the knowledge of industry-specific load composition data are limited, load model accuracy of the current utility practice is greatly compromised. In this paper, a new dynamic load modeling method is proposed by combining a template of a specific type of industrial facilities and the composite load model structure (CLOD) in the commercial software PSS/E. This method is relatively easier to implement in PSS/E and can still achieve reasonable accuracy. The proposed method consists of three steps: 1) create a template by conducting an in-depth load survey for a specific type of industrial facilities; 2) determine load composition of the facility that is required by PSS/E CLOD load model structure using the template; 3) create a PSS/E CLOD load model of the facility using the load composition data. To validate the proposed method, a case study and a sensitivity study are conducted using a real 110-megawatt (MW) Kraft paper mill facility. The case study verifies the accuracy of the proposed model by comparing simulation results with actual field measurements of the 110 MW Kraft paper mill facility; the sensitivity study shows the robustness of the proposed modeling method when subjected to load parameters variation. The proposed method can serve as a generic method for dynamic load modeling of any type of industrial facilities.

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)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations16
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower System Optimization and StabilityFrench-language works237,207