MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W84210518 · doi:10.2172/1212423

Addressing Energy Demand through Demand Response. International Experiences and Practices

2012· report· en· W84210518 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bo Shen, Girish Ghatikar, Chun Chun Ni, Junqiao Han Dudley, P Marietta Martin, Greg Wikler

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicEnergy, Environment, and Transportation Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemand responseEnergy demandOn demandEnergy (signal processing)Environmental economicsDemand managementBusinessEconomicsEngineeringCommerceMacroeconomicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Demand response (DR) is a load management tool which provides a cost-effective alternative to traditional supply-side solutions to address the growing demand during times of peak electrical load. According to the US Department of Energy (DOE), demand response reflects “changes in electric usage by end-use customers from their normal consumption patterns in response to changes in the price of electricity over time, or to incentive payments designed to induce lower electricity use at times of high wholesale market prices or when system reliability is jeopardized.” 1 The California Energy Commission (CEC) defines DR as “a reduction in customers’ electricity consumption over a given time interval relative to what would otherwise occur in response to a price signal, other financial incentives, or a reliability signal.” 2 This latter definition is perhaps most reflective of how DR is understood and implemented today in countries such as the US, Canada, and Australia where DR is primarily a dispatchable resource responding to signals from utilities, grid operators, and/or load aggregators (or DR providers).

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)0.004
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations22
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy, Environment, and Transportation PoliciesFrench-language works237,207