Inexact Fuzzy Chance-Constrained Fractional Programming for Sustainable Management of Electric Power 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
An inexact fuzzy chance-constrained fractional programming model is developed and applied to the planning of electric power systems management under uncertainty. An electric power system management system involves several processes with socioeconomic and environmental influenced. Due to the multiobjective, multilayer and multiperiod features, associated with these various factors and their interactions extensive uncertainties, may exist in the study system. As an extension of the existing fractional programming approach, the inexact fuzzy chance-constrained fractional programming can explicitly address system uncertainties with complex presentations. The approach can not only deal with multiple uncertainties presented as random variables, fuzzy sets, interval values, and their combinations but also reflect the tradeoff in conflicting objectives between greenhouse gas mitigation and system economic profit. Different from using least-cost models, a more sustainable management approach is to maximize the ratio between clean energy power generation and system cost. Results of the case study indicate that useful solutions for planning electric power systems management practices can be generated.
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