Optimizing Grid-Forming Wind Turbines Share for Frequency Regulation and LOLF Reduction in Modern Power Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores the optimal proportion of grid forming wind turbines (GFM-WTs) necessary for effective participation in frequency regulation during power system disturbances, with the aim of minimizing the loss of load frequency (LOLF) index. To achieve this, the security constrained unit commitment (SCUC) problem is first formulated and then solved to determine the dispatch of conventional and wind power plants. Then a generation unit for failure is selected based on predefined failure and repair rates. Wind turbines are categorized into grid following wind turbines (GFL-WTs), which do not contribute to frequency regulation, and GFM-WTs, which operate slightly below their maximum capacity to provide additional power support when needed. The Hydro-Québec controller is applied to GFM-WTs for frequency recovery. A Monte Carlo simulation is employed to assess the number of events in which the system frequency falls below 49.5 Hz, indicating an unstable power system that leads to load shedding. The optimal percentage of GFM-WTs is determined as the configuration that minimizes the LOLF index. The proposed methodology is implemented on the IEEE 24-bus reliability test system, demonstrating its effectiveness in enhancing frequency stability.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".