MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897437642 · doi:10.3390/en11102683

Schedule-Based Operation Method Using Market Data for an Energy Storage System of a Customer in the Ontario Electricity Market

2018· article· en· W2897437642 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pyeong-Ik Hwang, Seong-Chul Kwon, Sang-Yun Yun

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChosun University
KeywordsElectricity marketScheduleElectricityComputer scienceEnergy storageElectricity retailingEnvironmental economicsOrder (exchange)Operations researchElectric power systemReliability engineeringBusinessPower (physics)EconomicsElectrical engineeringEngineeringFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new operation method for an energy storage system (ESS) was proposed to reduce the electricity charges of a customer paying the wholesale price and participating in the industrial conservation initiative (ICI) in the Ontario electricity market of Canada. Electricity charges were overviewed and classified into four components: fixed cost, electricity usage cost, peak demand cost, and Ontario peak contribution cost (OPCC). Additionally, the online market data provided by the independent electricity system operator (IESO), which operates the Ontario electricity market, were reviewed. From the reviews, it was identified that (1) the portion of the OPCC in the electricity charges increased continuously, and (2) large errors can sometimes exist in the forecasted data given by the IESO. In order to reflect these, a new schedule-based operation method for the ESS was proposed in this paper. In the proposed method, the operation schedule for the ESS is determined by solving an optimization problem to minimize the electricity charges, where the OPCC is considered and the online market data provided by the IESO is used. The active power reference for the ESS is then calculated from the scheduled output for the current time interval. To reflect the most recent market data, the operation schedule and the active power reference for the ESS are iteratively determined for every five minutes. In addition, in order to cope with the prediction errors, methods to correct the forecasted data for the current time interval and secure the energy reserve are presented. The results obtained from the case study and actual operation at the Penetanguishene microgrid test bed in Ontario are presented to validate the proposed method.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.567
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207