MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Improvement of Microgrids Operation Considering Demand Response Using Imperialist Competitive Algorithm

2024· article· en· W4404103012 on OpenAlexafffund
Mahdi Ghaffari, Hamed H. Aly

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceDemand responseImperialist competitive algorithmAlgorithmAlgorithm designMathematical optimizationEngineeringMathematicsElectrical engineeringElectricityMetaheuristic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, with the restructuring and privatization of power networks, special attention has been paid to the role of customers in network operation. Therefore, demand response programs have played an important role in power network studies and many researchers have been working in this area. Microgrids are a collection of loads and generating units that can supply their own power independently. In this article, the problem of demand response of loads in a microgrid has been studied. For this purpose, the customers in a microgrid announce their proposed prices for participating in the demand response program to the network operator for different hours of the day. This demand response program will be executed when the network operation constraints are violated. Therefore, there is no need to run it in the hours when the network is operating properly. The network operator will run the demand response program with the aim of removing the constraints imposed on the network. For this purpose, the imperialist competitive algorithm (lCA) has been used to find the best possible solution. After running the proposed method, it will be determined how much power each load should reduce in each hour. The proposed method has been implemented on a sample network and its results have been evaluated and analyzed for different scenarios. The problem modeling has been done using MATLAB software. The results proved the effectiveness of the proposed model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.230
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207