MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134313495 · doi:10.1049/esi2.12003

On the perspective of grid architecture model with high TSO‐DSO interaction

2021· article· en· W3134313495 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Energy Systems Integration · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Security and Resilience
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)ArchitectureGridComputer scienceComputer architectureMathematicsArtificial intelligenceArtGeometryVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The conventional structure of operating transmission and distribution systems is currently experiencing new challenges in maintaining the system operability with the significant changes such renewable energy sources inclusion, technology development, infrastructure revolution, and services provision. A futuristic operation management paradigm at the high level of interaction between Transmission System Operators (TSOs) and Distribution System Operators (DSOs) is presented that supports the usage of flexibility services to simplify the congestion management, and ancillary services procurement by involving the DSO actively in the DSO‐TSO boundaries and the downstream network. The architecture considers new actors such as Distributed Services Aggregator, Prosumers, and Services Market Operators. A comparison between the typical grid structure (including the short‐term smart grid requirements) and the proposed one is presented considering different actors and interactions involved in the operation management of the grid. The opportunities and challenges of the proposed architecture are discussed.

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.

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 score0.553
Threshold uncertainty score0.296

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 head0.194
Teacher spread0.187 · 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