An Incentive-Based Multistage Expansion Planning Model for Smart Distribution Systems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The deployment of smart grids has facilitated the integration of a variety of investor assets into power distribution systems, giving rise to the consequent necessity for positive and active interaction between those investors and local distribution companies (LDCs). This paper proposes a novel incentive-based distribution system expansion planning model that enables an LDC and distributed generation (DG) investors to work in a collaborative way for their mutual benefit. Using the proposed model, the LDC would establish a bus-wise incentive program based on long-term contracts, which would encourage DG investors to integrate their projects at specific system buses that would benefit both parties. The model guarantees that the LDC will incur minimum expansion and operation costs while concurrently ensuring the feasibility of DG investors' projects. To derive appropriate incentives for each project, the model enforces several economic metrics including internal rate of return, profit investment ratio, and discounted payback period. All investment plans committed to by the LDC and the DG investors for the full extent of the planning period are then coordinated accordingly. Several linearization approaches are applied to convert the proposed model into an MILP model. The intermittent nature of both system demand and wind- and PV-based DG output power is handled probabilistically, and a number of DG technologies are taken into account. Case study results have demonstrated the value of the proposed model.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it