Intra- and Inter-Phase Power Management and Control of a Residential Microgrid at the Distribution Level
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A power control and management strategy for islanded residential microgrids is presented. A three-phase residential microgrid can be viewed as three separate single-phase systems. Within each phase, there are PV systems, battery storage devices, and droop controlled dispatchable units. Connections among phases are made through back-to-back converters to allow for power transfer between the phases. Hence, voltage and frequency control and power management must be carried out at intra-phase and inter-phase levels. The intra-phase power control and management system uses a modified vector control with a multi-segment (P/f) droop strategy. In the case where such a balance cannot be maintained locally, the inter-phase power can be transferred through the back-to-back converters. Both intra-phase and inter-phase power control and management scenarios have been considered. To demonstrate the effectiveness of the strategy, a detailed three-phase residential microgrid model is developed in PSCAD/EMTDC environment, including switching models of the back-to-back converters. The results have shown that the proposed strategies can effectively maintain desired voltage and frequency profiles for each phase-wise and the overall microgrid, frequency, and power balance in each phase can be effectively managed for stable operation.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".