Approach to dynamic voltage stability analysis for DFIG wind parks integration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, an improved voltage stability index that can evaluate the unstable behaviour of the power system with doubly‐fed induction generator (DFIG) wind parks integration is presented. Accordingly, voltage stability constrained optimal power flow (VSC‐OPF) is studied including an improved impedance‐based (IB) index. In particular, this study has two main contributions. First, it proposes an IB index with consideration of DFIG capability curve limits and on‐load tap changer (OLTC) behaviour. The proposed voltage stability index can detect precisely the voltage collapse, especially after the occurrence of a given contingency due to the dynamic elements of the system. In this study, a model is proposed for DFIG capability curve limits that can be integrated to the internal circuit of the generator. In particular, the proposed model can be appended to impedance matching theory. Furthermore, the OLTC model is added to this index. The index uses the concept of the coupled single‐port circuit. The second contribution proposes a VSCOPF with an improved IB index that is also compared with three existing VSC‐OPF methods in stressed and single line outage conditions. These approaches are tested and validated on modified WSCC test system, IEEE 39‐bus, IEEE 57‐bus and Polish 2746‐bus systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".