MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimal Planning of Distributed Generation Using Improved Grey Wolf Optimizer and Combined Power loss Sensitivity

2021· article· en· W3210757422 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimal Power Flow Distribution
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)Computer sciencePower lossPower (physics)Electric power systemStability (learning theory)VoltageDistributed generationKey (lock)Mathematical optimizationEngineeringElectronic engineeringMathematicsMachine learningElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces a hybrid method for finding the best location and size of distribution generation (DG) sources in a distribution system. The strategy employs Combined Power Loss Sensitivity (CPLS) and the algorithm Improved Grey Wolf Optimizer (I-GWO), with CPLS determining candidate locations for DG, and I-GWO determining the best location and size based on CPLS suggestions for candidate buses. The overall aim of this approach is to improve system stability, enhance voltage profile, and minimize power loss. The work evaluates the novel strategy using IEEE-33 and IEEE-69 bus radial distribution systems and investigates three kinds of DG to make comparisons of key efficiency and performance metrics. The test results show that, in comparison to Other optimization methods, the proposed hybrid approach with multi-objective functions offers optimal results.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.347
Threshold uncertainty score0.807

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptimal Power Flow DistributionFrench-language works237,207