MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3115796903 · doi:10.18280/mmep.070415

Solving Bid-Based Dynamic Economic Dispatch in Competitive Electricity Market Using Improved Simulated Annealing Algorithm

2020· article· en· W3115796903 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Riyadh Bouddou, Farid Benhamida, Ismail Ziane, Amine Zeggai, Moussa Belgacem

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Power System Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic dispatchElectricity marketProfit maximizationComputer scienceBiddingElectric power systemElectricityMathematical optimizationAutomatic Generation ControlProfit (economics)Power system simulationSimulated annealingOperations researchEconomicsMicroeconomicsAlgorithmPower (physics)EngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electricity markets are open after the deregulation of power systems due to competition. An optimization problem based on dynamic economic dispatch has recently come up in the new context of deregulated power systems known as bid-based dynamic economic dispatch (BBDED). It is one of the major operations and control functions in the electricity markets used to determine the optimal operations of market participants with scheduled load demands during a specified period. BBDED involves power generation companies (GENCOs) and customers to submit energy and price bids to the independent system operator (ISO) in a day-ahead market. The ISO clears the market with the objective of social profit maximization. In this paper, a BBDED problem is solved using an improved simulated annealing algorithm (ISA), including system constraints with different periods under bidding strategies. The proposed ISA technique is implemented in MATLAB and applied on a 3-unit system, a 6-unit system, and a 40-unit large-scale system. The proposed ISA is evaluated by comparison with relevant methods available in the literature, to demonstrate and confirm its potential in terms of convergence, robustness, and effectiveness for solving the BBDED problem.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 venueMathematical Modelling and Engineering ProblemsSame topicElectric Power System OptimizationFrench-language works237,207