Capacity Market for Distribution System Operator – with Reliability Transactions – Considering Critical Loads and Microgrids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conventional distribution system (DS) asset planning methods consider energy only from transmission systems (TS) and not from distributed energy resources (DER), leading to expensive plans. Newer transactive energy DS (TEDS) asset planning models, built on capacity market mechanisms, consider energy from both TS and DERs, leading to lower-cost plans and maximizing social welfare. However, in both methods the cost of higher reliability requirements for some users are socialized across all users, leading to lower social welfare. In this paper, a novel transactive energy capacity market (TECM) model is proposed for DS asset planning. It builds on TEDS incremental capacity auction models by provisioning for critical loads to bid and receive superior reliability as a service. The TECM model considers these reliability transactions, in addition, to selling energy transactions from TS and DERs, buying energy transactions from loads, and asset upgrade transactions from the network operator. The TECM model allows for islanded microgrids and network reconfiguration to maximize social welfare. The TECM model is assessed on several case studies, demonstrating that it achieves higher social welfare and a lower plan cost.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".