MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2792331020 · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2018.2809548

Power System Coherency Identification Under High Depth of Penetration of Wind Power

2018· article· en· W2792331020 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Khalil, Reza Iravani

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Systems · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Optimization and Stability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectric power systemSalientWind powerComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Power (physics)Wind speedPower system simulationEngineeringElectrical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper extends the dynamic coherency determination (DCD) method by including Type-3 wind power plants (WPPs) models in the coherency evaluation process and quantifies impacts of the high depth of wind power penetration on the coherency phenomena of interconnected power systems. The method is based on frequency-deviation signals, measured at nongenerator buses and terminal buses of WPPs and synchronous generators. Salient features of the presented method are its ability to account for the hybrid nature of enhanced generic models of Type-3 WPPs and expanding notion of the power system coherency beyond the classical definition by including models of Type-3 WPPs. This paper also investigates impacts of the high depth of wind power penetration; i.e., up to 30%, on the coherency structure of the 16-machine/68-bus NPCC equivalent system. The studies are based on time-domain simulations in PSS/E software. The investigations reveal that Type-3 WPPs can introduce new coherent areas, significantly change areas' boundaries and number of areas, and alter frequencies/dampings of interarea modes.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.219
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 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

Citations52
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power SystemsSame topicPower System Optimization and StabilityFrench-language works237,207