Wind‐assisted microgrid grid code compliance employing a hybrid Particle swarm optimization‐Artificial hummingbird algorithm optimizer‐tuned STATCOM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The importance of resolving stability concerns in weak AC grid‐connected doubly fed induction generator (DFIG) wind energy systems during low‐voltage ride‐through (LVRT) events cannot be ignored, given the increasing popularity of wind power‐based microgrids. Furthermore, the emergence of generation loss and postfault oscillation within a microgrid (MG) due to grid faults has also become a significant concern. The static synchronous compensator (STATCOM) under consideration in this study is tuned using particle swarm optimization (PSO), the artificial hummingbird algorithm (AHA), and a hybrid approach incorporating both PSO and AHA. Faults of both a symmetrical and an asymmetrical nature have occurred on the power grid side. The proposed hybrid PSO‐AHA‐tuned STATCOM strategy aims to improve LVRT, minimize power generation loss during faults, and reduce oscillations after a fault by controlling the flow of reactive power between point of common coupling (PCC) and MG. The MATLAB simulation environment was used to simulate the 16 MW MG test system. The performance of the PSO‐AHA‐tuned STATCOM was assessed by comparing results with those from conventional STATCOM, PSO, and AHA optimizer‐tuned STATCOM in four fault situations. A comparison of the results shows that the proposed strategy performed better than other approaches mentioned in this paper and achieved the desired objectives.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".