From Bottom-Up Towards a Completely Decentralized Autonomous Electric Grid Based on the Concept of a Decentralized Autonomous Substation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The idea of a decentralized electric grid has shifted from being a concept to a reality. The growing integration of distributed energy resources (DERs) has transformed the traditional centralized electric grid into a decentralized one. However, while most efforts to manage and optimize this decentralization focus on the electrical infrastructure layer, the operational and control layer, as well as the data management layer, have received less attention. Current electric grids rely on centralized control centers (CCCs) that serve as the electric grid’s brain, where operators monitor, control, and manage the entire grid infrastructure. Hence, any disruption caused by a cyberattack or a natural event, disconnecting the CCC, could have numerous negative effects on grid operations, including socioeconomic impacts, equipment damage, market repercussions, and blackouts. This article introduces the idea of a fully decentralized electric grid that leverages autonomous smart substations and blockchain integration for decentralized data management and control. The aim is to propose a blockchain-enabled decentralized electric grid model and its potential impact on energy markets, sustainability, and resilience. The model presented underlines the transformative potential of decentralized autonomous grids in revolutionizing energy systems for better operability, management, and flexibility.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".