MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766914404 · doi:10.3390/en10101650

A Survey on PEV Charging Infrastructure: Impact Assessment and Planning

2017· article· en· W2766914404 on OpenAlexafffund
Ahmed Abdalrahman, Weihua Zhuang

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBusinessEnvironmental economicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) represent a huge step forward in a green transportation system, contribute in reduction of greenhouse gas emission, and reduce the dependence on fossil fuel. Integration of PEVs into the electric power system will result in a considerable addition to electricity demand. Due to PEV mobility, this demand has a random distribution in space and time among distribution system nodes. Therefore, short term forecast of PEV charging demand is more challenging than that for conventional loads. Assessment of PEV impacts on the power system is essential to mitigate the impairments from PEV loads. Optimal planning of PEV charging infrastructure will promote the penetration rate of PEVs and minimize the negative impacts of PEVs on the electric power distribution system and transportation road network. Design of charging facilities with integrated distributed energy resources (DER) is considered a solution to alleviate strain on the grid, reduce the integration cost with the distribution network and the charging cost. In this paper, we present a comprehensive literature survey on modelling of PEV charging demand, impact assessment approaches and tools, and charging infrastructure planning. Moreover, an overview on charging facility design with integrated DER is given. Some future research directions are identified.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.480
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations32
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207