MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003861339 · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2969817

Distributed Reactive Power Regulation Considering Load Voltage and Power Loss

2020· article· en· W3003861339 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Guangdong ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAC powerVoltage regulationVoltage optimisationVolt-ampere reactiveVoltageComputer sciencePower (physics)Control theory (sociology)Power-flow studyPower factorConstant power circuitSlack busDistributed generationElectric power systemElectrical engineeringEngineeringControl (management)Renewable energyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, optimal reactive power regulation in distribution networks is achieved through the use of distributed reactive power regulators that can 1) perceive their own voltage magnitude and the P/Q flows in the connected branches, 2) communicate with nearby regulators, and 3) adjust the reactive power injections into the grid to minimize system power losses and maintain the bus voltages of nearby loads. Compared with many existing distributed reactive power regulation strategies, the proposed method can estimate and maintain the bus voltage of unmeasurable load buses within the limitations. Furthermore, this method releases the hardly achieved bus voltage angle requirement, which makes it practical for real-world.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.325
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

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)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.207 · 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