MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408145552 · doi:10.1109/tsg.2025.3547985

Leveraging Time-Causal State Variable Aggregation for Real-Time Schedule of Massive Air Conditioners

2025· article· en· W4408145552 on OpenAlexaff
Jingguan Liu, Xiaomeng Ai, Shichang Cui, Xizhen Xue, Shengshi Wang, Jiakun Fang, Jinyu Wen, Yang Shi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Smart Grid · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Control Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsScheduleAir conditioningVariable (mathematics)Computer scienceState (computer science)Real-time computingOperations researchEngineeringMathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Air conditioner (AC) loads offer promising flexibility for active distribution networks to manage uncertainties, such as those in renewable energy generation, electricity prices, and load demand. However, real-time scheduling of ACs is challenging due to their massive temporal coupling constraints and time-causal uncertainties. To address this, a novel time-causal aggregation-based approximate dynamic programming (TCA-ADP) algorithm is proposed for efficient scheduling. The time-causality requirements for aggregating state variables are first analyzed to align with the real-time sequential decision-making process. Subsequently, an enhanced aggregation model is developed to ensure both high accuracy and adherence to time causality. The aggregation process is further reformulated as a linear program to optimize aggregation parameters and enable tractable computation. Accordingly, the TCA-ADP leverages aggregated state variables to approximate the value function as a new way, balancing computational efficiency and economy against the large value function space of massive ACs. By training the value function offline using historical data, the TCA-ADP efficiently achieves near-optimal real-time scheduling of massive ACs through parallel and closed-form disaggregation. Case studies demonstrate the effectiveness and scalability of the TCA-ADP, highlighting its aggregation accuracy, uncertainty handling, and the trade-off between economy and tractability.

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)0.003
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Smart GridSame topicAdvanced Control Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207