Global sensitivity analysis to enhance the transparency and rigour of energy system optimisation modelling
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Background:</ns3:bold> Energy system optimisation models (ESOMs) are commonly used to support long-term planning at national, regional, or continental scales. The importance of recognising uncertainty in energy system modelling is regularly commented on but there is little practical guidance on how to best incorporate existing techniques, such as global sensitivity analysis, despite some good applications in the literature. </ns3:p> <ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Methods:</ns3:bold> In this paper, we provide comprehensive guidelines for conducting a global sensitivity analysis of an ESOM, aiming to remove barriers to adopting this approach. With a pedagogical intent, we begin by exploring why you should conduct a global sensitivity analysis. We then describe how to implement a global sensitivity analysis using the Morris method in an ESOM using a sequence of simple illustrative models built using the Open Source energy Modelling System (OSeMOSYS) framework, followed by a realistic example. </ns3:p> <ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Results:</ns3:bold> Results show that the global sensitivity analysis identifies influential parameters that drive results in the simple and realistic models, and identifies uninfluential parameters which can be ignored or fixed. We show that global sensitivity analysis can be applied to ESOMs with relative ease using freely available open-source tools. The results replicate the findings of best-practice studies from the field demonstrating the importance of including all parameters in the analysis and avoiding a narrow focus on particular parameters such as technology costs. </ns3:p> <ns3:p> <ns3:bold>Conclusions:</ns3:bold> <ns3:bold/> The results highlight the benefits of performing a global sensitivity analysis for the design of energy system optimisation scenarios. We discuss how the results can be interpreted and used to enhance the transparency and rigour of energy system modelling studies. </ns3:p>
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| 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 it