Developing and Testing a Unit-Commitment-Based Controller of Bus-Split Aggregated Residential Electric Water Heaters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article develops and tests a controller for residential electric water heaters (EWHs). The developed controller is operated to maximize the energy stored in EWHs during off-peak-demand times, in order to reduce their power demands during peak-demand times. Desired control actions aim to adjust the minimum temperature settings of EWHs using the unit commitment (UC). In order to eliminate the need for a direct measurement of EWH power demands, the bus-split (BS) aggregation method is employed. The BS method is employed due to its ability to extract the power demands of an EWH from household power meter readings. The UC is formulated using the energy stored in a EWH as a cost function, which is to be maximized during the off-peak-demand time. The solution of the UC problem is obtained using the Lagrange relaxation method that can offer fast convergence and reduced computations. The BS-UC controller is implemented for performance testing using power meter readings that are collected from 150 residential households during the fall, winter, spring, and summer seasons. Test results demonstrate the ability of the BS-UC controller to provide accurate and effective control of EWHs, which are complimented by a minor sensitivity to the number controlled EWHs, hot water consumption, and seasonal variations in residential load power demands.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".