MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3090162056 · doi:10.24295/cpsstpea.2020.00018

Residential Distribution System Harmonic Compensation Using Priority Driven Droop Controller

2020· article· en· W3090162056 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCPSS Transactions on Power Electronics and Applications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVoltage droopCompensation (psychology)HarmonicController (irrigation)Control theory (sociology)HarmonicsComputer scienceDistributed generationStability (learning theory)Work (physics)Power (physics)Electronic engineeringControl (management)Renewable energyEngineeringVoltageElectrical engineeringVoltage source

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As renewable energy based distributed generation (DG) units are being increasingly connected throughout today's distribution system, they can be used to mitigate harmonics caused by the wide adoption of nonlinear residential loads. To make the best use of all these DGs' ratings, it is important to develop a method to coordinate DGs' participation efforts in harmonic compensation according to their ratings and locations. Due to the low droop slope for the harmonic controller in DGs, traditional harmonic droop control methods can lead to significant harmonic sharing errors. Also, very limited work has been carried out in literature so far to identify the DGs' compensation priorities according to their locations and power rating. To address this issue, a novel priority-driven, droop-based, selective harmonic compensation scheme is developed in this work. The proposed control scheme improves the harmonic sharing accuracy. The compensation priority design and the way to integrate with droop control is studied. To ensure stability, a virtual impedance modelbased stability analysis is also discussed. Analysis, comparisons, and simulation results are used to verify the improvement of compensation performance.

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 score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.729

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.191 · 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