A Review on Application of Artificial Intelligence Techniques in Microgrids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A microgrid can be formed by the integration of different components such as loads, renewable/conventional units, and energy storage systems in a local area. Microgrids with the advantages of being flexible, environmentally friendly, and self-sufficient can improve the power system performance metrics such as resiliency and reliability. However, the design and implementation of microgrids are always faced with different challenges considering the uncertainties associated with loads and renewable energy resources, sudden load variations, energy management of several energy resources, etc. Therefore, it is required to employ such rapid and accurate methods, as artificial intelligence (AI) techniques, to address these challenges and improve the MG's efficiency, stability, security, and reliability. Utilization of AI helps to develop systems as intelligent as humans to learn, decide, and solve problems. This article presents a review on different applications of AI-based techniques in microgrids such as energy management, load and generation forecasting, protection, power electronics control, and cyber security. Different AI tasks such as regression and classification in microgrids are discussed using methods including machine learning, artificial neural networks, fuzzy logic, support vector machines, etc. The advantages, limitation, and future trends of AI applications in microgrids are discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".