MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226356661 · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3171234

Service Restoration Through Microgrid Formation in Distribution Networks: A Review

2022· review· en· W4226356661 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 · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMicrogridComputer scienceDistributed computingHeuristicGridDistributed generationElectric power distributionInteger programmingGraph theoryPartition (number theory)Service (business)Reliability engineeringPower (physics)Artificial intelligenceEngineeringAlgorithmRenewable energyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microgrid formation is a promising solution to enhance resiliency of distribution networks. The self-adequacy feature of a microgrid enables continuity of power supply through distributed generation (DG) units during severe faults and natural disasters. In this paper, different methods commonly used to partition a distribution network into multiple microgrids are presented, including the graph theory, heuristic rule-based algorithm, cluster-based technique, and mixed integer programming. Advantages and disadvantages of these techniques and future research directions are presented. This review provides an excellent summary on service restoration through micrgrid formation, and offers a valuable reference for researchers working on grid modernization of distribution networks.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.261 · 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