Optimal operation of active distribution networks hosting hybrid hydrogen‐electricity refuelling stations considering water demand under a stochastic‐IGDT approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper deals with the real‐time optimal operation of active distribution networks (ADNs) hosting hybrid hydrogen‐electricity refuelling stations by benefiting from renewable energy sources (RESs), conversion facilities, and energy storage systems. The hybrid refuelling stations, which are controlled by ADN operator, supply electricity and hydrogen for electric vehicles (EVs) and hydrogen vehicles (HVs), respectively. In addition, the deployment of water equipment technologies in the ADNs, is considered by utilizing water well pumps in the hybrid stations to serve water demand. The principal aim is to minimize the expected operation cost, including the cost of purchasing power from the upstream grid and maintenance and operation costs of each hybrid refuelling station. Various technical and physical constraints are considered to ensure the reliable operation and realistic scheduling of ADNs in the presence of hybrid refuelling stations. This study employs a hybrid information gap decision theory (IGDT)‐stochastic approach to address the uncertain behaviour of wholesale market price, electricity demand of EVs in refuelling stations, RESs output power and nodal demand of ADN to reach a risk‐averse strategy. The developed approach is coded under GAMS software and the effectiveness of the approach is validated by testing on the modified IEEE 33‐bus test system.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".