MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229449388 · doi:10.3390/en15103480

Enhanced Reactive Power Sharing and Voltage Restoration Based on Adaptive Virtual Impedance and Consensus Algorithm

2022· article· en· W4229449388 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamed Keddar, Mamadou Lamine Doumbia, K. Belmokhtar, Mohamed Della Krachai

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAC powerVoltage droopMicrogridController (irrigation)Electrical impedanceControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceVoltageElectronic engineeringPower (physics)EngineeringVoltage sourceElectrical engineeringControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, power-sharing management control on an AC islanded microgrid is investigated to achieve accurate reactive power sharing. The droop control method is primarily used to manage the active and reactive power sharing among the DGs in the microgrid. However, the line impedance mismatch causes unbalanced reactive power sharing. As a solution a consensus-based adaptive virtual impedance controller is proposed, where the consensus algorithm is used to set the reactive power mismatch; then a virtual impedance correction term is generated through a proportional-integral controller to eliminate the line impedance mismatch. Thus, reactive power sharing is achieved without knowledge of the line impedances or using a central controller. Moreover, the consensus algorithm is used to restore the AC bus voltage to the nominal value by estimating the DGs average voltage using neighbor communication to compensate for the decreased magnitude of the voltage reference. Matlab/Simulink is used to validate the accuracy of reactive power sharing and voltage restauration achievement of the proposed solution through simulation of different scenarios. In addition, a dSPACE DS1104 is used within a developed experimental testbench based on two parallel DGs to validate the effectiveness of the proposed solution in the real world.

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 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicMicrogrid Control and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207