Data-Driven Trajectory Prediction of Grid Power Frequency Based on Neural Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Frequency in power systems is a real-time information that shows the balance between generation and demand. Good system frequency observation is vital for system security and protection. This paper analyses the system frequency response following disturbances and proposes a data-driven approach for predicting it by using machine learning techniques like Nonlinear Auto-regressive (NAR) Neural Networks (NN) and Long Short Term Memory (LSTM) networks from simulated and measured Phasor Measurement Unit (PMU) data. The proposed method uses a horizon-window that reconstructs the frequency input time-series data in order to predict the frequency features such as Nadir. Simulated scenarios are based on the gradual inertia reduction by including non-synchronous generation into the Nordic 32 test system, whereas the PMU collected data is taken from different locations in the Nordic Power System (NPS). Several horizon-windows are experimented in order to observe an adequate margin of prediction. Scenarios considering noisy signals are also evaluated in order to provide a robustness index of predictability. Results show the proper performance of the method and the adequate level of prediction based on the Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) index.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".