MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411492823 · doi:10.3390/app15136973

Resilience Investment Against Extreme Weather Events Considering Critical Load Points in an Active Microgrid

2025· article· en· W4411492823 on OpenAlexaff
Avishek Sapkota, Rajesh Karki

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptimal Power Flow Distribution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResilience (materials science)Extreme weatherReliability engineeringMicrogridComputer scienceCriticalityVulnerability (computing)Critical infrastructureRisk analysis (engineering)Investment (military)BusinessEnvironmental resource managementEngineeringEnvironmental scienceComputer securityClimate change

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing frequency and severity of extreme weather events pose significant threats to power systems, particularly at the distribution level. The most detrimental consequence of such events is observed in critical loads due to high outage costs. As a result, there is a pressing need for utilities to invest in enhancing system resilience, which requires a comprehensive resilience investment framework and metrics to evaluate system performance. This paper proposes a distribution system resilience assessment framework to guide strategic investment decisions. The framework incorporates a mathematical model that estimates system restoration time after an extreme event, considering the criticality of loads, the interdependence of component failures and repair sequences, and the availability of repair crews. In addition, two new resilience metrics—disconnected load point hours (DLH) and normalized DLH (NDLH)—are introduced, which provide a more comprehensive view of system resilience by reflecting both vulnerability and the ability to withstand and recover from extreme events. Case studies are performed on a modified IEEE 69-bus test system utilizing the developed framework. The results evaluate the effectiveness of different resilience investment strategies, including infrastructure hardening, distributed energy resources management, and repair process coordination, in improving the system resilience for maintaining the critical loads and the overall distribution 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.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicOptimal Power Flow DistributionFrench-language works237,207