MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134694222 · doi:10.1109/access.2021.3061995

Coordination of Smart Home Energy Management Systems in Neighborhood Areas: A Systematic Review

2021· review· en· W3134694222 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHydro-QuébecUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
KeywordsComputer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)Smart gridGridProcess (computing)ElectricityDistributed computingProcess managementBusinessEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High penetration of selfish Home Energy Management Systems (HEMSs) causes adverse effects such as rebound peaks, instabilities, and contingencies in different regions of distribution grid. To avoid these effects and relieve power grid stress, the concept of HEMSs coordination has been suggested. Particularly, this concept can be employed to fulfill important grid objectives in neighborhood areas such as flattening aggregated load profile, decreasing electricity bills, facilitating energy trading, diminishing reverse power flow, managing distributed energy resources, and modifying consumers' consumption/generation patterns. This paper reviews the latest investigations into coordinated HEMSs. The required steps to implement these systems, accounting for coordination topologies and techniques, are thoroughly explored. This exploration is mainly reported through classifying coordination approaches according to their utilization of decomposition algorithms. Furthermore, major features, advantages, and disadvantages of the methods are examined. Specifically, coordination process characteristics, its mathematical issues and essential prerequisites, as well as players concerns are analyzed. Subsequently, specific applications of coordination designs are discussed and categorized. Through a comprehensive investigation, this work elaborates significant remarks on critical gaps in existing studies toward a useful coordination structure for practical HEMSs implementations. Unlike other reviews, the present survey focuses on effective frameworks to determine future opportunities that make the concept of coordinated HEMSs feasible. Indeed, providing effective studies on HEMSs coordination concept is beneficial to both consumers and service providers since as reported, these systems can lead to 5% to 30% reduction in electricity bills.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.256 · 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