MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Voltage Stability in Low-Voltage Distribution Grids Using Machine Learning Based Forecasting and MILP Based Optimization

2024· article· en· W4408442076 on OpenAlexaff
Hayat Ullah, Sadam Hussain, Bilal Khan, Chunyan Lai, Ursula Eicker

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoltageComputer scienceStability (learning theory)Control theory (sociology)Mathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceEngineeringMachine learningMathematicsElectrical engineeringControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Voltage stability is a key factor in the reliable operation of distribution grid in the context of dynamic loads and changing power demand. Conventional voltage control methods depend on reactive power control and static adjustments, which make them ineffective in managing the rapid fluctuations caused by the unpredictable and variable nature of new load patterns such as electric vehicles and smart appliances. This paper focuses on a new approach to ensure voltage stability in low-voltage (LV) distribution grids using machine learning based forecasting and mixed integer linear programming (MILP) based optimization models for household load forecasting and optimization. The long short-term memory model is used on historical time series household load data, which accurately forecasts the day-ahead (short-term) household load. Then the MILP based optimization model for the home energy management system uses the forecasted load data to optimize load and ensure voltage stability in the LV distribution grid. In the base case, there are 238 instances out of 960, where voltage violations occur, but in the optimized case, the voltage violations were reduced to 36 instances in one day for 10 houses, leading to improved voltage stability in the LV distribution grid.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.642
Threshold uncertainty score0.879

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207