MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979431759 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2019.8861590

Flexible Robust Unit Commitment Considering Sub-hourly Wind Power Ramp Behaviors

2019· article· en· W2979431759 on OpenAlexaff
Bo Hu, Yuzhong Gong, C. Y. Chung

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Power System Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPower system simulationWind powerUnit (ring theory)Power (physics)Control theory (sociology)Wind power forecastingComputer scienceMarine engineeringEnvironmental scienceElectric power systemMeteorologyElectrical engineeringEngineeringPhysicsPsychologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The focus of existing studies on day ahead unit commitment (DAUC) considering wind power have mainly been on the hourly operation constraints. However, if the sub-hourly wind power variations are not carefully considered, the obtained unit commitment (UC) solutions may not be flexible enough to accommodate the sub-hourly wind variations and results in wind curtailments. To ensure the full utilization of wind power, in this paper a robust optimization-based UC model considering sub-hourly wind power variation is proposed. The objective is to provide a flexible and robust UC solution for the thermal units, which ensures sufficient ramp up and ramp down reserves for the variations of wind power in the intra-hour time frame. Firstly, a non-parametric approach based on the 2-dimensional kernel density estimation is proposed to quantify the sub-hourly wind power variability. Then, based on the quantification results, a set of ramp constraints are imposed on the robust UC model. A column and constraint generation method is applied to solve the improved UC model. The proposed model is tested and compared with conventional UC models on IEEE 39 bus test system to verify its effectiveness.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.579
Threshold uncertainty score0.946

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Power System OptimizationFrench-language works237,207