MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392668139 · doi:10.3384/ecp204285

Exploiting Modelica and the OpenIPSL for University Campus Microgrid Model Development

2023· article· en· W4392668139 on OpenAlexaff
Fernando Fachini, Srijita Bhattacharjee, Miguel Aguilera, Luigi Vanfretti, Giuseppe Laera, Tetiana Bogodorova, Ardeshir Moftakhari, Michael Huylo, Atila Novoselac

Bibliographic record

VenueLinköping electronic conference proceedings · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsOpal-Rt Technologies (Canada)
FundersOffice of Energy EfficiencyU.S. Department of EnergyOffice of Energy Efficiency and Renewable EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsModelicaMicrogridFlexibility (engineering)Computer scienceControl engineeringProcess (computing)Modeling and simulationReliability (semiconductor)Generator (circuit theory)Task (project management)Systems engineeringReliability engineeringPower (physics)EngineeringSimulationProgramming languageControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The need for modeling different aspects of microgrid design and operation has seen the development of various tools over time for different analysis purposes. In this study, Modelica has been adopted as the language of choice to construct a University Campus Microgrid model, utilizing the Modelica Standard Library and the OpenIPSL library. This paper explores the advantages of utilizing Modelica for campus microgrid modeling, emphasizing its benefits and unique features. Modelica features, such as the use of record structures and replaceable templates prove to be particularly advantageous for the modeling task, enabling flexibility and efficiency in the modeling process. Furthermore, comprehensive validation tests are conducted to ensure the accuracy and reliability of sub-systems (e.g. specific power generator systems), before assembling the microgrid network model as a whole. The results demonstrate the efficacy of Modelica in accurately modeling and simulating microgrids, highlighting its potential for advancing microgrid research and development.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.004

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLinköping electronic conference proceedingsSame topicMicrogrid Control and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207