Addressing the Conditional and Correlated Wind Power Forecast Errors in Unit Commitment by Distributionally Robust Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a study of the day-ahead unit commitment problem with stochastic wind power generation is presented, which considers conditional, and correlated wind power forecast errors through a distributionally robust optimization approach. Firstly, to capture the characteristics of random wind power forecast errors, the least absolute shrinkage, and selection operator (Lasso) is utilized to develop a robust conditional error estimator, while an unbiased estimator is used to obtain the covariance matrix. The conditional error, and the covariance matrix are then used to construct an enhanced ambiguity set. Secondly, we develop an equivalent mixed integer semidefinite programming (MISDP) formulation of the two-stage distributionally robust unit commitment model with a polyhedral support of random variables. Further, to efficiently solve this problem, a novel cutting plane algorithm that makes use of the extremal distributions identified from the second-stage semidefinite programming (SDP) problems is introduced. Finally, numerical case studies show the advantage of the proposed model in capturing the spatiotemporal correlation in wind power generation, as well as the economic efficiency, and robustness of dispatch decisions.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".