MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406254453 · doi:10.3390/app15020610

Bulk System Reliability Assessment Incorporating Nodal Correlations in Supply–Demand Variabilities and Uncertainties Created with Net-Zero Emission Targets

2025· article· en· W4406254453 on OpenAlexaff
Deeksha Sharma, Rajesh Karki

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNet (polyhedron)Zero (linguistics)Reliability (semiconductor)Reliability engineeringEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceMathematicsPhysicsEngineeringThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Growing global concerns over reducing carbon emissions in the electricity market have accelerated the integration of renewable energy sources and electric vehicles, increasing variabilities and uncertainties across various nodes of power networks. System planners and operators recognize the importance of probabilistic bulk system reliability assessment methods capable of capturing the real-time behavior of components in the emerging systems. In this regard, the paper proposes a methodology for conducting bulk system reliability assessments of power system networks characterized by variable supply and demand profiles at different bulk power points. This paper implements a nodal negative load modeling method to integrate wind power generation in reliability assessment, capturing the cross-correlation between demand–supply variabilities at any node of the network. The multi-state load model employs the load cut-off strategy to reduce the number of demand scenarios, enhancing the computational efficiency. Moreover, the multi-state wind modeling approach considers the penetration levels, ensuring the impact of increasing penetration is appropriately captured. The methodology determines a list of a reduced set of scenarios for which consequence assessment needs to be conducted. The proposed framework and methods can readily be applied by power utilities, as these methods can be incorporated into most commercial software that uses an analytical approach for CSR assessment. The methodology is illustrated using the Roy Billinton Test System (RBTS) and can be effectively applied to other networks.

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)0.004
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207