MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396215649 · doi:10.2316/j.2024.203-0486

REMEDIAL ACTION SCHEME FOR WIND POWER INJECTION WITH MINIMUM TRANSMISSION LINE LOSS, 1-10.

2024· article· en· W4396215649 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anuj Kumar Rao, Pratim Kundu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Power and Energy Systems · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHVDC Systems and Fault Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Engineering Research Board
KeywordsWind powerElectric power transmissionTransmission lineGridAutomotive engineeringElectric power systemComputer scienceEngineeringElectrical engineeringPower (physics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rise in power demands and concern over climate change is leading to increased penetration of wind energy into the grid.However, the transmission network infrastructure is not equipped for such a transition.Transmission lines are responsible for the transfer of electric power from generating stations to load centres and consumers.In this process, the lines incur losses which affect the quality of power.Also, it has an economic impact on the utilities.Therefore, such losses must be minimised so that the power quality can be improved and economic losses are less.With the increase in the percentage of wind energy integration in the grid, the transmission line losses are increasing.To address this problem, a remedial action scheme (RAS) has been proposed for increasing wind energy penetration in the grid with minimum transmission line losses.To achieve this, the proposed method uses a multiobjective optimisation problem which is solved using the genetic algorithm.For varying transmission line losses, the multi-objective optimisation problem determines the optimal generation from each wind generator.The proposed RAS is tested for the New England 39-bus network and the results highlight the performance of the method to maximise the wind power injection.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.815
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Power and Energy SystemsSame topicHVDC Systems and Fault ProtectionFrench-language works237,207