MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134573681 · doi:10.1109/tsg.2020.3024148

A Three-Layer Stochastic Energy Management Approach for Electric Bus Transit Centers With PV and Energy Storage Systems

2020· article· en· W3134573681 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Yuan Liu, Hao Liang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Smart Grid · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhotovoltaic systemVoltageEnergy storageEnergy managementMinificationAutomotive engineeringStochastic programmingEnergy management systemEngineeringComputer scienceElectrical engineeringEnergy (signal processing)Power (physics)Mathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Along with the increasing electric bus (EB) penetration, the impact of the extensive charging load on the distribution system has been aggravating. To mitigate such impact, energy storage systems (ESSs) and photovoltaic (PV) are usually installed in the EB transit centers (EBTCs). In this article, a three-layer stochastic energy management approach is proposed for EBTCs to reduce the operation cost while maintaining local voltage quality. In the first layer, a modified robust optimization over time (ROOT) approach is developed to obtain the charging/discharging margin with minimum EBTC operation cost. In the second layer, the voltage regulation impact on the local voltage quality is estimated through power flow analysis considering voltage fluctuation and line loss minimization. In the third layer, the charging/discharging strategy is optimized with dynamic programming based on a modified greedy algorithm. The performance of the proposed approach is evaluated in a case study based on the IEEE 123-bus test feeder and the real operation data obtained from St. Albert Transit in Alberta, Canada. The results indicate that the proposed approach can not only minimize the EBTC operation cost but also well maintain the local voltage quality, in comparison with existing energy management approaches.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.168
Teacher spread0.159 · 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

Citations38
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Smart GridSame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207