MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3014680910 · doi:10.3390/su12072813

Optimal Placement of TCSC for Congestion Management and Power Loss Reduction Using Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm

2020· article· en· W3014680910 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

VenueSustainability · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Optimization and Stability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationMathematical optimizationReduction (mathematics)Genetic algorithmHeuristicElectric power systemConvergence (economics)Differential evolutionComputer scienceAlgorithmPower (physics)EngineeringControl theory (sociology)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electricity demand has been growing due to the increase in the world population and higher energy usage per capita as compared to the past. As a result, various methods have been proposed to increase the efficiency of power systems in terms of mitigating congestion and minimizing power losses. Power grids operating limitations result in congestion that specifies the final capacity of the system, which decreases the conventional power capabilities between coverage areas. Flexible AC Transmission Systems (FACTS) can help to decrease flows in heavily loaded lines and lead to lines loadability improvements and cost reduction. In this paper, total power loss reduction and line congestion improvement are assessed by determining the optimal locations and compensation rates of Thyristor-Controlled Series Compensator (TCSC) devices using the Multi-Objective Genetic Algorithm (MOGA). The results of applying the proposed method on the IEEE 30-bus test system confirmed the efficiency of the proposed procedure. In addition, to check the performance, applicability, and effectiveness of the proposed method, different heuristic algorithms, such as the multi-objective Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) algorithm, Differential Evolution (DE) algorithm, and Mixed-Integer Non-Linear Program (MINLP) technique, are used for comparison. The obtained results show the accuracy and fast convergence of the proposed method over the other heuristic techniques.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score0.583

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.237 · 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