MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912035026 · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2019.2896219

Probabilistic Power Flow Calculation Using Non-Intrusive Low-Rank Approximation Method

2019· article· en· W2912035026 on OpenAlexafffund
Hao Sheng, Xiaozhe Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Optimization and Stability
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsProbabilistic logicMathematical optimizationMonte Carlo methodAlgorithmRandomnessMathematicsExponential functionPolynomialRandom variableComputer scienceApplied mathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a novel non-intrusive probabilistic power flow (PPF) analysis method based on the low-rank approximation (LRA) is proposed, which can accurately and efficiently estimate the probabilistic characteristics (e.g., mean, variance, and probability density function) of the PPF solutions. This method aims at building up a statistically-equivalent surrogate for the PPF solutions through a small number of power flow evaluations. By exploiting the retained tensor-product form of the univariate polynomial basis, a sequential correction-updating scheme is applied, making the total number of unknowns to be linear rather than exponential to the number of random inputs. Consequently, the LRA method is particularly promising for dealing with high-dimensional problems with a large number of random inputs. Numerical studies on the IEEE 39-bus, 118-bus, and 1354-bus systems show that the proposed method can achieve accurate probabilistic characteristics of the PPF solutions with much less computational effort compared to the Monte Carlo simulations. Even compared to the polynomial chaos expansion method, the LRA method can achieve comparable accuracy, while the LRA method is more capable of handling higher-dimensional problems. Moreover, numerical results reveal that the randomness brought about by the renewable energy resources and loads may inevitably affect the feasibility of dispatch/planning schemes.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.236
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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations64
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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