MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393253108 · doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2024.3382814

Power Swing in Systems With Inverter-Based Resources—Part I: Dynamic Model Development

2024· article· en· W4393253108 on OpenAlex
Mohamad‐Amin Nasr, Ali Hooshyar

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Power Delivery · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwingElectric power systemInverterDevelopment (topology)Computer sciencePower (physics)EngineeringElectrical engineeringControl engineeringElectronic engineeringVoltagePhysicsMathematicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While power swing is a well-understood phenomenon in conventional power systems, the power swing characteristics of systems with inverter-based resources (IBRs) remain significantly under-theorized. This paper demonstrates that this knowledge gap carries practical ramifications, including the potential to undermine the stability and reliable protection of future grids, where swing dynamics can be heavily influenced by IBRs. The paper investigates power swing in systems with IBRs in two parts. Part I of the paper develops the necessary relations to devise a novel state-space model for systems with IBRs. This analytical model is necessary to (i) quantitatively identify the distinct characteristics of power swings in IBR-rich grids, and (ii) theoretically prove that these characteristics can be generalized. The paper highlights fundamental differences between this new model and the well-established model for power swings in systems that consist solely of synchronous machines (SMs). To reveal the features of power swing in systems with mixed generation types, the paper also systematically incorporates the dynamic equations of SMs into the developed model. The accuracy of the proposed model is evaluated against PSCAD/EMTDC simulation results for a benchmark test system that includes multiple IBR plants and their detailed control systems. Part II of the paper will build upon the findings from Part I to investigate the implications of the specific features of IBRs' power swing from the perspective of power system protection.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.835

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.168 · 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