Optimal tie‐line and battery sizing for remote provisional microgrids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Unlike traditional microgrids, Provisional Microgrid (PMG) utilizes only renewable generation and small energy storage units; thus, it does not have an inherent self‐islanding capability and instead, relies on importing power from any coupled microgrid (CMG) for islanding purposes. Therefore, assuring adequate power sharing between interconnected provisional and coupled MGs is crucial for assuring self‐islanding capability and reliable operation. The optimal power that can be transferred between the coupled MG and the PMG is mainly restricted by the size of the interconnecting tie‐line; hence, determining the tie‐line optimal size becomes a crucial task that must be tackled. Furthermore, the amount of power transferred is significantly influenced by the flexibility level of each microgrid. Since battery storage systems (BSS) is the main source of flexibility in PMGs, it becomes also vital to obtain the optimal size of the BSS for planning islanded PMG system. This paper presents an optimization model to jointly determine the optimal size of the BSS in each MG and the tie‐line size to assure optimal power sharing and minimum system cost (tie‐line investment cost, BSS investment cost, and interconnected system’s operation cost). Numerical results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed model.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".