MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2629831979 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2017.7946600

Linearized power flow for stochastic optimization

2017· article· en· W2629831979 on OpenAlexaff
Dawit Fekadu Teshome, Melkamsew Tenaw Enyew

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Power System Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical optimizationEconomic dispatchComputer scienceElectric power systemComputationLinear programmingPiecewise linear functionPower (physics)Iterative methodPiecewisePower flowStochastic programmingAC powerControl theory (sociology)AlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The behavior of network constraints in economic dispatch and unit commitment problem is examined in this paper. It analyses the constraints related to the power flow in a stochastic programming tool and tests different approaches for transmission loss computation. This work is part of an ongoing effort to develop tools for stochastic analysis of hybrid generation systems based up on the existing models but stressing on the network constraints and developing some proposals in linearizing AC power flow equations. The work takes a sample power network system in order to evaluate different approaches to model the transmission losses in a dispatch problem then compares the methods based on accuracy, computational burden and simplicity. The methods comprise iterative algorithm, piecewise linear loss function and a proposed linearizing approach on approximating AC power flow equations. The results show that the linearized AC method utilizes more computational resources and complicated formulation but with an improved accuracy. It can also integrate voltage magnitudes for further improvement in accuracy while the other two only employ a simplified formulation with a lowered accuracy.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Power System OptimizationFrench-language works237,207