Building‐to‐grid optimal control of integrated MicroCSP and building HVAC system for optimal demand response services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The world is shifting toward cleaner and more sustainable power generation to face the challenges of climate change. Renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, hydraulic are now the go‐to technologies for the new power generation system. However, these sources are highly intermittent and introduce uncertainty to the power grid which affects its frequency and voltage and could jeopardize its stable operations. The integration of micro‐scale concentrated solar power (MicroCSP) and thermal energy storage with the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system gives the building greater leeway to control its loads which can allow it to support the power grid by providing demand response (DR) services. Indeed, the optimal control of the power flowing between the MicroCSP, the HVAC system, and the thermal zones can bring additional degrees of freedom to the building which can be relegated to the power grid based on the objective function and the incentives provided by the latter. This article presents an in‐depth investigation of the MicroCSP potential to provide ancillary services to the power grid. It focuses on evaluating the effect of incentives provided by the power grid on the building participation to the load following programs. It also demonstrates how the MicroCSP can help the building deal with constraints related to load peak shaving and ramp‐rate reduction set by the power grid as part of long‐term DR contracts. A sensitivity analysis is carried out to confront the results to prediction uncertainties of the energy prices and the weather conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".