Parallel stochastic programming for energy storage management in smart grid with probabilistic renewable generation and load models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Renewable power generation combined with energy storage (ES) is expected to bring enormous economical and environmental benefits to the future smart grid. However, the ES management in smart grid is facing significant technical challenges due to the volatile nature of renewable energy sources and the buffering effect of ES units. The challenges are further complicated by the increasing size and complexity of the system, as well as the consideration of random usage patterns of electrical appliances by customers. To address these challenges, this study proposes a parallel decomposition method for large‐scale stochastic programming in a distribution system with renewable energy sources and ES units. By leveraging nested decomposition, the problem can be converted into independent sub‐problems with a series of time periods. In addition, the reformulated problem is fully parallel for speed up in execution. The performance of the proposed method is evaluated based on the IEEE 4‐bus and 33‐bus test distribution systems with real photovoltaic generation and electrical appliance usage data. The case study demonstrates that the proposed scheme can substantially reduce the system operation cost, with low computational complexity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".