MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3117200669 · doi:10.1109/tsg.2020.3048648

Aggregated BESS Dynamic Models for Active Distribution Network Studies

2020· article· en· W3117200669 on OpenAlexaff
Fabian Calero, Claudio A. Cañizares, Kankar Bhattacharya

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Smart Grid · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAC powerBenchmark (surveying)Transmission (telecommunications)Electric power systemComputer scienceBoundary (topology)EngineeringPower (physics)Control theory (sociology)Electronic engineeringVoltageElectrical engineeringControl (management)TelecommunicationsMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article proposes a transmission-system-level aggregated model of Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESSs) distributed through Active Distribution Networks (ADNs), to study the dynamic performance and services provided by these systems to power grids. ADNs comprise intelligent loads, local generation, particularly solar PV, and BESSs, which can provide different services to transmission grids, including voltage control, oscillation damping, frequency regulation, and active and reactive power injections. Proper equivalent models of the ADN components allow to evaluate the impact and integration of these networks on power grids. In this article, ADN's measurements of the aggregated response of the BESSs at the boundary bus with the transmission system are used to develop an aggregated black-box model based on two Neural Networks (NNs), one for active power and another for reactive power, with their optimal topology obtained using a Genetic Algorithm (GA). Detailed simulations are performed, using a commercial-grade software for power system analysis, of multiple BESSs connected to a CIGRE benchmark ADN connected to a bus of the 9-bus WSCC benchmark transmission network; the test ADN is then replaced by the proposed black-box model, with aggregated models of the loads and PV generation, demonstrating that the proposed model can accurately reproduce the results obtained.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.230
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations28
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Smart GridSame topicMicrogrid Control and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207