MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911347525 · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2019.2897727

A Review of Power System Flexibility With High Penetration of Renewables

2019· review· en· W2911347525 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Baraa Mohandes, Mohamed Shawky El Moursi, Nikos Hatziargyriou, Sameh El Khatib

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Systems · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Internet Registration Authority
KeywordsFlexibility (engineering)Electric power systemRenewable energyRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceVolatility (finance)Reliability engineeringEnvironmental economicsPower (physics)Computer securityBusinessEngineeringEconomicsElectrical engineeringFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The notion of secure operation of power systems, with its present semantic, dates back to the last decade. Since then, tremendous research effort has investigated secure operation of the power system. Nevertheless, operators are still faced with security issues, with even larger uncertainty, however, caused by the integration of renewable energy sources (RES). The system's ability to cope with the volatility of RES and load becomes a critical issue in power system operation. This paper surveys the literature on the concepts of power system flexibility, indices of flexibility, and implementation of the concept of flexibility in power system security. The paper proceeds to review the origin of the reserve problem, the meaning of reserve, its technical classification and related economical aspects. The paper highlights the effect of renewables on these aspects, and suggests new research directions.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations470
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Power SystemsSame topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207