MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2793551652 · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2018.2808819

Measurement-Based Sparsity-Promoting Optimal Control of Line Flows

2018· article· en· W2793551652 on OpenAlexafffund
Abdullah Al-Digs, Sairaj V. Dhople, Yu Christine Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Systems · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Optimization and Stability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Science Foundation of Sri LankaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLinear-quadratic-Gaussian controlControl theory (sociology)Linear-quadratic regulatorKalman filterController (irrigation)Optimal controlOffset (computer science)AC powerElectric power systemEngineeringControl engineeringComputer sciencePower (physics)Mathematical optimizationControl (management)VoltageMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes an optimal strategy for regulating active-power flows in electric power systems based on sparsity-promoting linear-quadratic-Gaussian (LQG) control. The proposed method relies on the mapping of nodal active- and reactive-power injections to line flows, which are obtained via a measurement-based approach. Building on this, we outline a combined sparsity-promoting linear-quadratic regulator and Kalman-filter design. The optimal controller sparsity is identified using the alternating direction method of multipliers, which strikes a balance between feedback controller sparsity and the closed-loop dynamic performance. With this, we optimally dispatch generators and controllable loads to achieve desired line flows while ensuring zero steady-state frequency offset. We demonstrate the utility of the proposed LQG controller via a representative congestion-management application deployed on the New England 10-machine 39-bus test system.

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations22
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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