MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110512617 · doi:10.1109/oajpe.2020.3031526

Energy Storage as a Service: Optimal Pricing for Transmission Congestion Relief

2020· article· en· W3110512617 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 Open Access Journal of Power and Energy · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Power System Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsService (business)BusinessTransmission (telecommunications)Environmental economicsComputer scienceEconomicsMarketingTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on pricing Energy Storage as a Service (ESaaS) for Transmission congestion relief (TCR). We consider a merchant storage facility that competes in an electricity market to trade energy and ancillary services on a day-to-day basis. The facility also has the opportunity to provide a firm TCR service to a regional network operator under a long-term contract. Providing the additional TCR service would impose limitations on the facility's ability to fully harvest daily market trade opportunities. Thus, we model the opportunity costs associated with the TCR service and use it in a hybrid cost-value customized pricing technique to determine the risk-constrained optimal price of ESaaS for TCR. Given the long-term nature of the commitment to provide the TCR service, we use the Conditional Value at Risk (CVaR) metric to mitigate the long-term financial risks faced by the facility. The proposed pricing strategy enables the storage owner to estimate the additional financial gains and the associated risks that would likely result from adding the new service to its operation. Numerical simulations are provided to support the proposed methodology.

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 score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score0.632

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 communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.264 · 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