MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deep Reinforcement Learning for Direct Load Control in Distribution Networks

2020· article· en· W3113846595 on OpenAlexaff
Shahab Bahrami, Yu Christine Chen, Vincent W. S. Wong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNews aggregatorReinforcement learningMarkov decision processComputer scienceControl (management)Markov processArtificial neural networkMathematical optimizationDemand responseMarkov chainOperations researchArtificial intelligenceEngineeringElectricityMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Direct load control enables load aggregators in distribution networks to remotely curtail customers' appliances during peak time periods. This paper proposes a direct load control algorithm for residential customers, while accounting for the uncertainties in the customers' discomfort from curtailing their demand as well as the operational constraints imposed by the distribution network. We model the load control problem as a Markov decision process (MDP). Solving such an MDP is challenging due to the ac power flow equations and the unknown dynamics of the system states (i.e., price, demand, and customer's discomfort). We develop a deep reinforcement learning algorithm based on the actor-critic method that enables the load aggregator to consider the distribution network constraints and the consequences of its past decisions to update the neural network parameters for the policy and value function without any knowledge of the system dynamics. Simulations are performed on an IEEE 85-bus test feeder with 59 households. Results show that the load aggregator learns to reduce the peak load by 16.7%, while taking into account the distribution network constraints. Also, the customers' cost is decreased by 26.6% on average; thereby reaching a win-win outcome.

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 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 score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

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 head0.183
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207