MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409902842 · doi:10.18280/jesa.580317

Performance Comparison of FACTS (UPFC) and HVDC in Power Flow Optimization via Genetic Algorithms

2025· article· en· W4409902842 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimal Power Flow Distribution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPower flowGenetic algorithmPower (physics)Unified power flow controllerComputer scienceFlow (mathematics)AlgorithmElectric power systemControl theory (sociology)Mathematical optimizationMathematicsPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Power transmission networks play a critical role in linking generation and distribution systems.One key aspect of the network's performance is voltage optimization.This study focuses on comparing the impacts of High-Voltage Direct Current (HVDC) transmission and Flexible Alternating Current Transmission Systems (FACTS), specifically the Unified Power Flow Controller (UPFC), on system voltage stability, grid power losses, and transmission capacity under load fault conditions.This present study develops the IEEE 30-bus and IEEE 57-bus systems as test cases, incorporating Genetic Algorithms (GA) to analyze the effects of HVDC and UPFC integration.The Power System Simulator for Engineering (PSS/E) version 33 software program is used to model multi-terminal UPFC and HVDC.A comparative study is performed between the system's performance with and without HVDC and UPFC under various load conditions in the transmission network.Three load conditions were analyzed.The results demonstrate that for the IEEE 30-bus system, the total active power loss under normal load conditions is reduced by 69.594% after adding UPFC between buses (3-4) and by 75% after introducing multi-terminal VSC-HVDC between buses (2-6) and (2-4).Similarly, reactive power losses are reduced by 74% with UPFC and 73% with multi-terminal VSC-HVDC under the same conditions.For the IEEE 57-bus system, the addition of UPFC and VSC-HVDC improves active and reactive power losses by 49% and 55%, respectively, under normal load conditions.The studied results confirm that connecting HVDC to the system achieves better results in terms of bus voltage profile, a significant reduction in total network power losses, and a higher effective power transfer rate compared to UPFC.Moreover, multi-terminal HVDC transmission delivers greater voltage improvements and larger reductions in total power losses compared to adding UPFC to the same system.

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.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.348
Threshold uncertainty score0.778

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.231 · 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