Load Synchronization and Sustained Oscillations Induced by Transactive\n Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transactive or market-based coordination strategies have recently been\nproposed for controlling the aggregate demand of a large number of electric\nloads. Such schemes offer operational benefits such as enforcing distribution\nfeeder capacity limits and providing users with flexibility to consume energy\nbased on the price they are willing to pay. However, this paper demonstrates\nthat they are also prone to load synchronization and power oscillations. A\ntransactive energy framework has been adopted and applied to a population of\nthermostatically controlled loads (TCLs). A modified TCL switching logic takes\ninto account market coordination signals, alongside the natural\nhysteresis-based switching conditions. Studies of this market-based\ncoordination scheme suggest that several factors may contribute to load\nsynchronism, including sharp changes in the market prices that are broadcast to\nloads, lack of diversity in user specified bid curves, low feeder limits that\nare encountered periodically, and the form of user bid curves. Case studies\nillustrate challenges associated with market-based coordination strategies and\nprovide insights into modifications that address those issues.\n
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".