Multi-objective optimization of Hybrid Energy Systems based on Life Cycle Exergy and Economic criteria
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
The present study aims to develop a novel optimal design of hybrid energy systems based on exergy and lifecycle concepts using genetic algorithms. The model consists of both stand-alone and on-grid options with scenarios for exchanging energy with the grid. The objectives include cost minimization or benefit maximization primarily, and lifecycle exergy efficiency, i.e., cost as the sustainability index secondarily. This research considers renewable sources such as solar, wind, hydropower, and hydrogen production and storage in addition to conventional diesel generators. The optimization was performed subject to weather conditions and solar radiation profiles, demand, and environmental or economic aspects. Also, the model contains various modules such as water-heating, waste energy utilization, as well as the options of power exchange with the distribution network and injection of hydrogen produced from excess renewable sources into the gas network. The application was demonstrated in a case study, where specific demands and the climate of Tehran were assumed. The case study considers four scenarios, including standalone, completely on-grid, on-grid with a non-backup generator, and on-grid without an energy sale option. The first optimal objective, the levelized unit cost of energy for the standalone system, is $0.22 per kWh. Moreover, the second optimal objective, the lifecycle exergy cost, ranges from 1.93 to 4.13 in different grid-connection states.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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