MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124301240 · doi:10.3390/math9020186

Impact of Renewable Energy Sources into Multi Area Multi-Source Load Frequency Control of Interrelated Power System

2021· article· en· W3124301240 on OpenAlexaff
Krishan Arora, Ashok Kumar, Vikram Kumar Kamboj, Deepak Prashar, Bhanu Shrestha, Gyanendra Prasad Joshi

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFrequency Control in Power Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersChandigarh University
KeywordsRenewable energyWind powerElectric power systemEnergy sourceElectricity generationComputer scienceAutomotive engineeringPower (physics)EngineeringEnvironmental scienceElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is an increasing concentration in the influences of nonconventional power sources on power system process and management, as the application of these sources upsurges worldwide. Renewable energy technologies are one of the best technologies for generating electrical power with zero fuel cost, a clean environment, and are available almost throughout the year. Some of the widespread renewable energy sources are tidal energy, geothermal energy, wind energy, and solar energy. Among many renewable energy sources, wind and solar energy sources are more popular because they are easy to install and operate. Due to their high flexibility, wind and solar power generation units are easily integrated with conventional power generation systems. Traditional generating units primarily use synchronous generators that enable them to ensure the process during significant transient errors. If massive wind generation is faltered due to error, it may harm the power system’s operation and lead to the load frequency control issue. This work proposes binary moth flame optimizer (MFO) variants to mitigate the frequency constraint issue. Two different binary variants are implemented for improving the performance of MFO for discrete optimization problems. The proposed model was evaluated and compared with existing algorithms in terms of standard testing benchmarks and showed improved results in terms of average and standard deviation.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.223
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations49
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMathematicsSame topicFrequency Control in Power SystemsFrench-language works237,207