MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406032042 · doi:10.23977/jeeem.2024.070311

Aggregation Equivalence and Evaluation Method of Multiple Doubly-fed Wind Farms for Subsynchronous Oscillation Characteristics Analysis

2024· article· en· W4406032042 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Electrotechnology Electrical Engineering and Management · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicPower Systems and Renewable Energy
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersScience and Technology Project of State GridState Grid Corporation of China
KeywordsEquivalence (formal languages)Oscillation (cell signaling)Control theory (sociology)MathematicsEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceChemistryDiscrete mathematicsControl (management)Artificial intelligenceBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of subsynchronous oscillation (SSO) caused by large-scale wind farm integration seriously poses a threat to the safe and stable operation of high-proportion renewable energy power systems. To reduce the order of the system model and improve the simulation efficiency, this paper puts forward an aggregation equivalence and evaluation method of multiple doubly-fed wind farms for SSO characteristics analysis. Firstly, an aggregation equivalence method for multiple doubly-fed wind farms is proposed. The main influencing factors in the SSO analysis are taken as the clustering objects, and the simulated annealing (SA) algorithm and fuzzy c-means (FCM) clustering algorithm are combined to quickly obtain the wind farm clustering sets and equivalent model parameters. Secondly, the evaluation index of the wind farm equivalent models is proposed. The optimal equivalent scheme is selected by comparing the impedance characteristic curves of the equivalent model with that of the detailed model. Finally, taking the actual project as an example, the effectiveness of the proposed method for SSO characteristics analysis is verified.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.760
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Electrotechnology Electrical Engineering and ManagementSame topicPower Systems and Renewable EnergyFrench-language works237,207