Dynamic modeling and quantitative computational assessment of grid power supply capacity at multi-temporal and spatial scales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maximum supply capacity calculation is an important issue in grid planning, and with the large amount of renewable energy sources connected to the grid, the voltage instability problem becomes more and more prominent.In this paper, the maximum power supply capacity (TSC) of partitioned flexible interconnected grids under multi-temporal and spatial scales is dynamically modeled, and the TSC model is solved by using the deep deterministic policy gradient (DDPG) method to achieve quantitative assessment of the TSC of the grid.Meanwhile, the effectiveness of the model and algorithm is verified through simulation experiments.The stepwise approximation method and DDPG algorithm without considering the transient voltage stabilization constraints and the obtained TSC in which the node voltages are less than 0.80 p.u. are all greater than 1.0 s, and the transient voltages are destabilized.While the DDPG algorithm considering transient voltage stabilization, the obtained node voltage is greater than 0.80p.u., and the transient voltage is in a stable state, which indicates that the algorithm can effectively reduce the risk of transient voltage instability in the power grid.The sum of the TSCs of A and B divisions after the zonal flexible interconnection is 9348 MW, which is higher than the sum of the TSCs of 8696 MW during the zonal open-loop operation, indicating that the zonal flexible interconnection can improve the overall TSC level of the power grid.In addition, compared with the traditional algorithm and other reinforcement learning algorithms, the TSC calculation based on the DDPG algorithm is more efficient and accurate.This paper provides methodological guidance for evaluating the power supply capacity of power grids at multi-temporal and spatial scales.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".