MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785460528 · doi:10.1109/epec.2017.8286162

Reliability assessment of hydro dominant systems with diurnal energy management

2017· article· en· W2785460528 on OpenAlexaff
Fei Fang, Rajesh Karki

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)Reliability engineeringEnvironmental scienceHydroelectricityEnergy storageInflowWater storagePumped-storage hydroelectricityEnergy (signal processing)Electricity generationComputer scienceEnergy managementPower (physics)EngineeringMeteorologyStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydro-electric generation is often energy limited due to insufficient river inflow during dry seasons. This can result in significant adverse impact on long term system adequacy. Most hydro plants are run-of-river types that have small head pond with limited storage capability to manage available energy to follow the demand variation. The opportunity for reliability enhancement of a hydro-dominant system through diurnal water management with the limited storage needs to be properly investigated. This paper presents analytical reliability models of head pond and power generation to recognize energy storage and the magnitude and time-shift of output power to match the diurnal load profile during energy limited periods of the year. The developed models are applied to the IEEE Reliability Test System that is modified to create a hydro dominant system. The impact on system reliability of diurnal energy management and the number plants involved in energy management are investigated in the study.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207