MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785415183 · doi:10.1109/pesgm.2017.8274600

Optimal scheduling of energy storage to mitigate power quality issues in power systems

2017· article· en· W2785415183 on OpenAlexaffabout
Hadi Khani, Hany E. Z. Farag

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Power System Optimization
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProfitability indexEnergy storageArbitrageComputer scienceProfit (economics)Linear programmingElectric power systemScheduling (production processes)Renewable energyGridMathematical optimizationInteger programmingElectricityProfit maximizationPeaking power plantReliability engineeringEnvironmental economicsDistributed generationPower (physics)EngineeringEconomicsElectrical engineeringFinanceMicroeconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a new optimal scheduling algorithm is proposed to enhance the economic feasibility of integrating energy storage systems (ESSs) in power grids. In addition to the profit gained by ESS owners from arbitrage, ESSs can contribute to mitigate power quality (PQ) issues in power systems. Toward that end, using a mixed-integer linear programming optimization problem, an adaptive reserve margin is created in the ESS reservoir; this enables an ESS to accept and follow the PQ external signals received from the grid operator. A new index is proposed to measure the ESS contribution to mitigation of PQ issues. Due to its contribution to mitigate PQ issues, the ESS owner is financially compensated by the grid operator. This financial benefit can be added to the regular profit resulted from exploiting arbitrage, thereby increasing the profitability of investment in ESSs. Numerical studies are conducted using actual data adopted from Ontario's electricity market.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.693

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Power System OptimizationFrench-language works237,207