MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

MISO’s Regional Long Range Transmission Planning: A Proactive and Holistic Planning Approach

2023· article· en· W4387005646 on OpenAlexaff
Fatou B. Thiam, James Slegers, Jeremy Nash, Tung Nguyen, Matthew H. Tackett, Joseph Reddoch, Jarred Miland

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Power System Optimization
Canadian institutionsIndependent Electricity System Operator
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFutures contractRenewable energyScenario planningElectric power systemTime horizonGridPortfolioEnvironmental economicsWind powerEnergy planningElectricity marketScenario analysisRetirement planningBusinessComputer scienceElectricityEngineeringEconomicsPower (physics)MarketingFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The energy ecosystem is evolving, resulting in a paradigm shift in the Market, Planning and Operations of the electric power grid. Retirement of conventional generation, increased penetration of renewable resources, and growing electrification will continue with policy support for decarbonization of the grid. The power industry is reacting and adapting to the evolving resource mix. As part of its response to these drivers, Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) is leading major efforts, redefining its Planning, Operations and Market Systems. Long Range Transmission Planning (LRTP), one of the workstreams under MISO’s Reliability Imperative, recognizes the need for proactive and holistic planning and assesses reliability risks 10-20 years into the future. The intensity, frequency and severity of extreme weather events further highlight need for Long Range Transmission planning, to facilitate regional delivery of energy to serve generation deficient areas. LRTP is informed by the Renewable Integration Impact Assessment (RIIA) and MISO’s Futures (forward-looking planning scenarios). RIIA, a technically rigorous and systematic analysis, evaluated increasing levels of wind and solar resources penetration on the MISO footprint. The “Futures” address uncertainty over a long-term horizon. The first tranche of the LRTP effort identified a ${\$}$10.3 billion portfolio comprised of eighteen projects with over 2,000 miles of new transmission lines for the MISO Midwest subregion. The business case for LRTP identified a Benefit-to-Cost ratio of 2.6 overall.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Power System OptimizationFrench-language works237,207