Useful Application of Machine learning Methods in Smart Grids: A Mini Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Smart grids are necessary because the traditional electricity grids are outdated, inefficient, and vulnerable to failures. Smart grids enable better monitoring, control, and management of the electricity grid, ensuring a more reliable and stable power supply. They can integrate renewable energy sources into the grid, reduce energy consumption during peak hours, and improve resilience to natural disasters and cyber threats. On the other hand, machine learning techniques are necessary in modern power systems to improve the performance, efficiency, and sustainability of the electricity grid. They enable real-time monitoring and control of the grid, predicting energy consumption patterns, optimizing grid performance, and detecting anomalies. By integrating machine learning algorithms, power systems can adjust their outputs to match changes in energy demand, improve renewable penetration and reduce carbon emissions. They also provide insights that can guide decision-making, improve asset management, and reduce maintenance costs. With the integration of machine learning techniques, power systems can promote a more sustainable and reliable power supply, enhances grid security, and improves the experience for both energy providers and end-users. Thus, this paper aims to summarize the benefits and useful application of machine learning methods within the smart grids.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".