MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2773032997 · doi:10.23919/picmet.2017.8125281

Typology of Business Models for Adopting Grid-Scale Emerging Storage Technologies

2017· article· en· W2773032997 on OpenAlexaff
Kourosh Malek, Jatin Nathwani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusiness modelEnergy storageElectricity marketEnvironmental economicsElectricityRenewable energyGridProfitability indexComputer scienceDistributed generationSmart gridEfficient energy useRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessEngineeringMarketingEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electricity grids are nowadays facing various market and technological challenges that influence their reliability and profitability. As a viable solution to those challenges, energy storage technologies provide multiple service delivery along the electricity grid value chain. In addition to their role for penetration of renewables in future of electricity grid, electricity storage technologies possess a number of societal and environmental benefits, such as reducing carbon footprint and securing regional energy demands. The primary challenge for utilities and regulators, however, is to find a business model that best fits to technology, application, and regional electricity market. We propose a typology of different business models for adopting energy storage technologies among utilities. The business model frameworks are tailored to provide a customized analysis platform for adopting emerging energy storage technologies. For industry looking to adapt new energy storage technologies, such analysis can provide multi-dimension considerations (cost, efficiency, reliability, best practice business operation model, and policy instruments), which can potentially lead to complete view for strategic decision making purposes.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207