MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3150285454 · doi:10.18280/mmep.080102

Locating and Sizing of Distributed Generation Sources and Parallel Capacitors Using Multiple Objective Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm

2021· article· en· W3150285454 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematical Modelling and Engineering Problems · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimal Power Flow Distribution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationSizingComputer scienceReduction (mathematics)Genetic algorithmMathematical optimizationCapacitorVoltageAlgorithmConstraint (computer-aided design)EngineeringMathematicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the MOPSO algorithm has been used to locate and determine the capacity of distributed generation sources and capacitor banks in the distribution system. The intended objective function is a combination of different objective functions. The first goal is to reduce losses, and the second goal is to improve the voltage profile and the third goal is to reduce costs, which has been used by placing weight coefficients in the form of an objective function in the algorithms. For this purpose, the standard 33-bus system has been used to conduct studies. Studies have been repeated in three scenarios. In the first scenario, the locating and determination of the capacity of active and reactive resources has been accomplished with the approach of reducing losses and improving the voltage profile. However, in the second scenario, the locating and determining the capacity of these resources has been accomplished with loss and cost reduction approach and it was considered as constraint in voltage profile. In the third scenario, the simultaneous reduction of all three objective functions has been performed simultaneously. To validate the results obtained by the MOPSO algorithm, its results were compared with genetic and particle swarm algorithms. The results indicate better and more accurate performance of MOPSO algorithm in minimizing objective functions relative to other two algorithms.

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 score0.322
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.176 · 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