diff --git a/docs/figures/03_osier_chapter/dispatch-flow.tex b/docs/figures/03_osier_chapter/dispatch-flow.tex new file mode 100644 index 0000000..298a66c --- /dev/null +++ b/docs/figures/03_osier_chapter/dispatch-flow.tex @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ +\begin{tikzpicture}[node distance=1.7cm] + \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] + \node (1) [lbblock]{\textbf{Sort technologies by marginal cost}}; + \node(2) [lbblock, below of =1] {\textbf{Start dispatch loop}}; + \node(3) [lbblock, below of=2] {\textbf{Calculate power output for + next technology}}; + \node(4) [lbblock, below of=3] {\textbf{Decrement current demand + value \\ by power output}}; + \node(5) [lbblock, below of=4] {\textbf{Reached last technology?}}; + \node (7) [lbblock, below of=5] {\textbf{Reached the end of the + demand time series?}}; + \node (8) [loblock,below of=7] {\textbf{Done}}; + \draw [arrow] (1) -- (2); + \draw [arrow] (2) -- (3); + \draw [arrow] (3) -- (4); + \draw [arrow] (4) -- (5); + \draw [arrow] (5) -- node[anchor=east]{yes} (7); + \draw [arrow] (5) -- ([shift={(0.5cm,0cm)}]5.east) -- node[anchor=west] + {no} ([shift={(0.5cm,0cm)}]3.east)--(3); + \draw [arrow] (7) -- (8); + \draw [arrow] (7) -- node[anchor=east]{yes} (8); + \draw [arrow] (7) -- ([shift={(1.15cm,0cm)}]7.east) -- node[anchor=west] + {no} ([shift={(1.15cm,0cm)}]2.east)--(2); +\end{tikzpicture} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/00-overview.tex b/pres/00-overview.tex deleted file mode 100644 index 7ae064d..0000000 --- a/pres/00-overview.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,66 +0,0 @@ -\subsection{Presentation Goals} -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Presentation Goals} - % Confession: I am not a social scientist. A significant part of preparing for this prelim involved reading and developing ideas - % that feel original to me but may have a - - - I have the following goals for this presentation: - - \begin{enumerate} - \item \boldorange{Motivate} why social science and quantitative modeling \textit{must} be more strongly integrated - (based on the relations among three types of uncertainty). - \item \boldorange{Demonstrate} how \texttt{Osier} currently accomplishes this goal. - \item \boldorange{Propose} future work to enhance \texttt{Osier}'s capabilities and validate its usage. - \end{enumerate} - - and I hope to show the \boldorange{layered novelty} of this work as a corrolary of the above. - -\end{frame} -\subsection{Proposal Overview} -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Proposal Overview} - - I propose to: - - \begin{enumerate} - % \item \textcolor{blue}{\textbf{Deepen}} the theoretical foundations of this work. - \item \boldblue{Deepen} the theoretical foundations of this work. - \item \boldblue{Develop} an optimization tool (\texttt{Osier}) that - \begin{itemize} - \item addresses three related uncertainties, - \item closes the gap between technical expertise and public preferences, - \item enhances justice outcomes related to energy planning. - \end{itemize} - \item \boldblue{Validate} this tool by conducting a case study of energy planning processes - in the Champaign-Urbana region. - \end{enumerate} - -\end{frame} - -% \begin{frame} -% \frametitle{moral relativism} - -% Avoiding moral relativism. For example, in an effort to be inclusive and create a more deliberative democracy, -% we cannot include voices whose normative premise is antithetical (i.e., exclusionary) to an inclusive normative -% premise.\\~\\ - -% Motivating question: If a more inclusive decision making process produces more legitimate (i.e., ``just'') outcomes, -% how can members of the public adequately participate in deliberation on issues perceived by experts as highly technical?\\~\\ - -% For example, what role could the public possibly play in choosing a reactor design --- let alone whether a nuclear reactor -% is the right energy technology for their community --- without understanding nuclear energy and energy systems writ large?\\~\\ - -% The instinctual response from the nuclear industry, specifically, and scientists and engineers, generally, is to ``debunk'' -% myths about nuclear energy or educate the public on the relevant science based on a theory of science communication called -% the ``deficit model.'' This is a pathological response from a neurotic and self-conscious discipline that is continually -% reproduced in spite of the clear failures of this strategy. The result is confusion among many nuclear engineers about -% why the ignorant public refuses to update their Bayesian priors on nuclear energy after receiving authoritative information -% about its benefits. While there are trends suggesting the public perception of nuclear energy has improved in recent years, -% attributing a causal relationship between this improvement and any direct action on the part of the nuclear industry is -% dubious at best. If you will forgive my speculation, I would hypothesize this shift is influenced more greatly by the -% increasing impacts of climate change and the public's growing desperation for solutions, rather than a wholehearted approval -% of nuclear technology.\\~\\ - -% Instead, what if we recognized that the public has preferences that could be translated and incorporated into -% \end{frame} diff --git a/pres/01-introduction.tex b/pres/01-introduction.tex new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d4f1b04 --- /dev/null +++ b/pres/01-introduction.tex @@ -0,0 +1,379 @@ +\section{Introduction} + +\subsection{Background} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{The Challenge at Hand} + \begin{block}{Purpose of Energy System Modeling} + Modeling allows us to make predictions, test hypotheses, and understand + counterintuitive behavior.\\~\\ + \textit{Models inform energy policy with prescriptive analyses + \cite{decarolis_using_2011}.} + \end{block} + \begin{block}{Problem} % But, models are limited. Quantitative models are + % especially limited in their ability to describe the ``human dimension.'' + Policies affect people --- energy systems models cannot adequately + capture the ``human dimension'' \cite{pfenninger_energy_2014}. + \end{block} + \begin{block}{What is the ``human dimension?''} + \begin{enumerate} + \item People have preferences about their sources of energy that are + ignored. + \item Models cannot describe policy outcomes related to fairness or + justice. + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Three tenets of justice} + \begin{figure} + \centering + % \resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{ + \begin{tikzpicture} + \begin{scope}[blend group = soft light] + % \fill[red!30!white] ( 90:1.2) circle (2); + \fill[illiniorange] ( 90:1.2) circle (2); + % \fill[green!30!white] (210:1.2) circle (2); + \fill[illiniorange] (210:1.2) circle (2); + % \fill[blue!30!white] (330:1.2) circle (2); + \fill[illiniorange] (330:1.2) circle (2); + \end{scope} + \node at ( 90:2) {Recognition}; + \node at ( 210:2) {Distributive}; + \node at ( 330:2) {Procedural}; + \node[font=\Large] {\textcolor{black}{Justice}}; + \end{tikzpicture} + + % } + \caption{Three aspects of justice \cite{schlosberg_1_2007}.} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Climate change highlights energy system injustices} + Our \boldorange{changing climate} and additional demand drivers from data + centers and \gls{ai} \boldorange{disproportionately impact} marginalized groups and require a \boldorange{just transition} from fossil + fuels to clean energy. + \begin{columns} + \column[t]{5cm} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/01_introduction/mauna-loa-co2.pgf}} + % \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/mauna-loa-co2.pgf}} + \caption{Observed increase in CO$_2$ levels at Mauna Loa Observatory + \cite{kane_atmospheric_1996}.} + \label{figure:mauna-loa} + \end{figure} + + \column[t]{5cm} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/01_introduction/emissions-by-source.pgf}} + % \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/emissions-by-source.pgf}} + \caption{Lifecycle carbon emissions by energy source + \cite{united_nations_economic_commission_for_europe_carbon_2022}.} + \label{figure:energy-emissions} + \end{figure} + \end{columns} + +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Addressing climate change?} + + \begin{block}{Just Energy Transition} + \begin{enumerate} + \item Requires new, low carbon, energy projects. + \item Adhering to values of democracy necessitates local support + for these projects. + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} + \begin{block}{Public Opposition --- it's not NIMBY} + Perceptions of fairness and inclusion, rather than NIMBY attitudes, + condition local support + \cite{konisky_proximity_2021,aitken_why_2010,stokes_prevalence_2023,firestone_public_2012-1}. + \end{block} + \begin{block}{} + Public testimony can be dismissed for being non-technical + \cite{johnson_dakota_2021}. Existing energy planning processes and + new energy projects (even ``clean energy'' projects) reproduce + existing sociopolitical structures that violate principles of + justice. + \end{block} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{\glspl{esom}} + \Glspl{esom} are a class of tools designed to + optimize this transition. + \\ + % (Provide examples?) + + They will become more important with more \gls{vre} + and more volatile weather. + \\\\ + \textit{But they have at least two big flaws}. + \begin{enumerate}[<+->] + \item All current \glspl{esom} optimize a single objective --- cost. + \item \glspl{esom} struggle to model the ``human dimension'' thereby + limiting their ability to address justice \cite{pfenninger_energy_2014}. + \end{enumerate} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Energy Modeling and Distributional Justice} + \begin{columns} + \column[t]{3cm} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{ + \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] + \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] \tikzstyle{vertex} = + [circle, draw=black, fill=trueilliniorange] + \tikzstyle{unfocus} = [circle, draw=gray, fill=illiniorange] + \tikzstyle{hidden} = [draw=none] \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, + very thick] + + \node[vertex](v3) at (0,2) + {\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Distribution}}}; + \node[unfocus](v2) at (0,0) + {\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Procedural}}}; \node[unfocus](v1) + at (0,-2) {\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Recognition}}}; + + \end{tikzpicture}} + \end{figure} + \column[t]{7cm} + \begin{block}{ESOMs and Distributional Justice} + ESOM literature has begun considering distributional justice + \cite{neumann_near-optimal_2021,sasse_distributional_2019,obrecht_integrating_2020}. + \end{block} + \begin{block}{} + \begin{itemize} + \item Quantifiable + \item ``Objective'' --- research questions can be purely + descriptive. + \end{itemize} + \end{block} + \end{columns} + +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Energy Modeling and Procedural/Recognition Justice} + \begin{columns} + \column[t]{3cm} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{ + \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] + \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] \tikzstyle{vertex} = + [circle, draw=black, fill=trueilliniorange] + \tikzstyle{unfocus} = [circle, draw=gray, fill=illiniorange] + \tikzstyle{hidden} = [draw=none] \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, + very thick] + + \node[unfocus](v3) at (0,2){\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Distribution}}}; + \node[vertex](v2) at (0,0) {\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Procedural}}}; + \node[vertex](v1) at (0,-2){\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Recognition}}}; + + \end{tikzpicture}} + \end{figure} + \column[t]{7cm} + \begin{block}{Procedural Justice} + ESOM literature now emphasizes code and data transparency + \cite{decarolis_formalizing_2017} and highlights the importance of + producing \textit{insight} rather than \textit{answers} + \cite{decarolis_using_2011}. + \end{block} + \pause + \begin{block}{} + However, the literature does not consider the ways its methods + inform policies. Do energy system models make this more transparent or less? + \end{block} + \pause + \begin{block}{Recognition Justice} + As a corollary of its lack of self-awareness, the ESOM literature + does not address recognition justice at all --- modeling is + independent from public influence. + \end{block} + \begin{block}{} + How inclusive is energy modeling of community preferences? + \end{block} + \end{columns} + +\end{frame} + +% \begin{frame} +% \frametitle{Three tenets of justice} +% \begin{figure} +% \centering +% % \resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{ +% \begin{tikzpicture} +% \begin{scope}[blend group = soft light] +% % \fill[red!30!white] ( 90:1.2) circle (2); +% \fill[illiniorange] ( 90:1.2) circle (2); +% % \fill[green!30!white] (210:1.2) circle (2); +% \fill[illiniorange] (210:1.2) circle (2); +% % \fill[blue!30!white] (330:1.2) circle (2); +% \fill[illiniorange] (330:1.2) circle (2); +% \end{scope} +% \node at ( 90:2) {Recognition}; +% \node at ( 210:2) {Distribution}; +% \node at ( 330:2) {Procedural}; +% \node[font=\Large] {\textcolor{black}{Justice}}; +% \end{tikzpicture} + +% % } +% \caption{Three aspects of justice \cite{schlosberg_1_2007}.} +% \end{figure} +% \end{frame} + +\subsection{Introducing \gls{osier}} +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{\gls{osier}} + I developed \gls{osier} to fill these gaps by \cite{dotson_osier_2024} + \begin{enumerate}[<+->] + \item optimizing multi- and many-objective problems, + \item allowing user-defined objectives, + \item facilitating multi-criteria decision making, + \item being accessible and usable. + \end{enumerate} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{How \gls{osier} Works} + + \begin{figure} + \centering + \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{../docs/figures/03_osier_chapter/osier_flow.png} + \caption{Flow of data into and within \gls{osier}} + \label{fig:osier-flow-1} + \end{figure} + % [Show the data flow diagram] + + % Osier works by leveraging genetic algorithms... +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Evolutionary Algorithms} + + \begin{columns} + \column[t]{6cm} + \begin{block}{Evolutionary Algorithms for Energy System Optimization} + \begin{itemize} + \item Inspired by natural selection + \item Parallelizable + \item Superior to pure linear programming methods for + \begin{itemize} + \item independence from problem convexity + \item good sampling/spacing of points along solution set. + \end{itemize} + \end{itemize} + + Right: Evolutionary algorithm flow \cite{deb_evolutionary_2014}. + \end{block} + \column[t]{4cm} + \centering + \begin{figure} + \includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{images/ea-flow.png} + \end{figure} + \end{columns} +\end{frame} + + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Pareto Fronts} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \resizebox{0.75\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/02_literature_review/truss2d_pareto.pgf}} + \caption{\gls{osier} generates a set of \boldorange{co-optimal solutions} called a \boldorange{Pareto front}.} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Dispatch Modeling} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{images/osier_dispatch_example.png} + \caption{\gls{osier} dispatch for an energy system with nuclear plus battery storage.} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame}[fragile] + \frametitle{User defined objectives} + % \scriptsize + \begin{minted}[ frame=lines, framesep=2mm, baselinestretch=1.2, bgcolor=LightGray, +fontsize=\footnotesize, linenos ]{python} + + nuclear.readiness = 9 + fusion.readiness = 3 + + technology_list = [nuclear, fusion] + + def osier_objective(technology_list, solved_dispatch_model): + """ + Calculate the capacity-weighted technology readiness + score for this energy mix. + """ + + total_capacity = np.array([t.capacity for t in technology_list]).sum() + + objective_value = np.array([t.readiness*t.capacity + for t in technology_list]).sum() + + return objective_value / total_capacity + \end{minted} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Constrained optimization} + + \begin{figure} + \centering + \includegraphics[width=0.75\columnwidth]{images/osier_constraint.png} + \caption{Osier Pareto front with and without emissions constraint.} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{High-dimensional Pareto fronts} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/04_benchmark_chapter/4_obj_objective_space_MGA.pgf}} + \caption{Objective space for a four-objective problem.} + \label{fig:4-obj-space} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} + + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Documentation as a feature} + \url{https://osier.readthedocs.io} +\end{frame} + + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Goals from Preliminary Exam} + + \begin{block}{Prelim Goals} + \begin{enumerate}[<+->] + \item \boldorange{Improve} \gls{osier} by + \begin{enumerate} + \item Adding a new, faster, dispatch algorithm + \item Developing an enhanced \gls{mga} algorithm + \end{enumerate} + \item \boldorange{Validate} \gls{osier}'s usefulness through a + multiple-case study of energy decision-making in Illinois. + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} + \pause + \begin{block}{Presentation Objectives} + \frametitle{Objectives of this presentation} + \begin{enumerate}[<+->] + \item Show the technical improvements to \gls{osier}. + \item Demonstrate how \gls{osier} can be used to evaluate nuclear fuel cycle options. + \item Share the results from the case study. + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} +\end{frame} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/02-bucket-01.tex b/pres/02-bucket-01.tex new file mode 100644 index 0000000..4bc8060 --- /dev/null +++ b/pres/02-bucket-01.tex @@ -0,0 +1,259 @@ +\section{Technical Improvements to \gls{osier}} + +\subsection{Logical Dispatch Algorithm} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{What is the dispatch algorithm?} + + \begin{figure} + \centering + \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{../docs/figures/03_osier_chapter/osier_flow.png} + \caption{Flow of data into and within \gls{osier}} + \label{fig:osier-flow} + \end{figure} + % [Show the data flow diagram] + + % Osier works by leveraging genetic algorithsm... +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Comparing the two methods} + + \begin{columns} + + \column[t]{5cm} + + \begin{block}{Optimal Dispatch (Original Method)} + \begin{itemize}[<+->] + \item Select the decision variables, $x_{g,t}$, which minimize + the operational cost of the model according to some constraints. + \item Decision variables correspond to the \textit{generation} + of each technology at each timestep in the model. + \item Perfect foresight, guaranteed optimality. + \end{itemize} + \end{block} + % \pause + \column[t]{5cm} + \begin{block}{Logical Dispatch (New Method)} + \begin{itemize}[<+->] + \item Simple algorithm + \begin{enumerate} + \item Sort the technologies by total operating cost (ties are + broken by efficiency). + \item For each demand timestep, calculate the power output for + each technology until demand is met, or you run out of + technologies. + \end{enumerate} + \item Myopic, dispatch optimality is not guaranteed. + \end{itemize} + \end{block} + \end{columns} + +\end{frame} + +% \begin{frame} +% \frametitle{Comparing the two methods} + +% \begin{columns} + +% \column[t]{5cm} + +% \begin{block}{Optimal Dispatch (Original Method)} +% \begin{align} +% \left(\sum_t^T\sum_g^G \left[C_{g,t}^{fuel} + C_{g,t}^{vom}\right]x_{g,t} +% \right)+\left(\sum_t^T\sum_g^S x_{g,t}c_{g,t}\pi\right) +% \end{align} +% \end{block} +% % \pause +% \column[t]{5cm} +% \begin{block}{Logical Dispatch (New Method)} +% \begin{figure} +% \centering +% \resizebox{!}{\textheight}{\input{../docs/figures/03_osier_chapter/dispatch-flow.tex}} +% \caption{The hierarchical dispatch flow.} +% \label{fig:hierarchy_algorithm} +% \end{figure} +% \end{block} +% \end{columns} + +% \end{frame} + + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Verifying the Original Method} + + \begin{figure} + \centering + \resizebox{0.75\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/04_benchmark_chapter/temoa_osier_benchmark_01.pgf}} + \caption{Comparison of the least-cost solutions from \gls{osier} and + \gls{temoa}, as well as their sub-optimal spaces. + \boldorange{\gls{osier}'s least-cost solution is within 0.5\% of + \gls{temoa}'s}.} + \label{fig:osier-temoa-benchmark} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{\textit{In silico} Experiments} + + In order to verify the new dispatch algorithm I conducted several + experiments. + \pause + \begin{block}{Direct comparison} + Compare the dispatch results from the two algorithms with three different technology mixes. + \begin{enumerate} + \item Natural Gas and Nuclear + \item ``\dots'' plus Wind + \item ``\dots'' plus Storage + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} + \pause + \begin{block}{Time scaling} + Measure the solve time for each algorithm as the number of modeled timesteps increases. + \end{block} + \pause + \begin{block}{Thread scaling} + Demonstrate parallelization with the the new dispatch algorithm. + \end{block} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Verifying the New Method} + + \begin{table} + \centering + \caption{Results from a small study comparing the two dispatch + algorithms. \boldorange{Except for case three, the two algorithms show + perfect agreement.}} + \label{tab:alg-comparison} + \resizebox{0.8\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/tables/algorithm_comparison_results_edited.tex}} + \end{table} + +\end{frame} + +% \begin{frame} \frametitle{Comparing the methods} + +% \begin{enumerate} \item The original algorithm is a linear program and +% optimizes all timesteps simultaneously. \item The new algorithm is +% based on merit order rules, the least expensive technology is +% dispatched first. This algorithm is myopic. \end{enumerate} + +% \end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Time scaling for two dispatch algorithms} + + \begin{figure} + \centering + \resizebox{0.72\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/04_benchmark_chapter/algorithm_scaling_plot.pgf}} + \caption{Scaling results for the two dispatch algorithms. + \boldorange{The logical dispatch algorithm demonstrates a 2.5x - 40x + speedup over the original formulation.}} + \label{fig:time-scaling} + \end{figure} + +\end{frame} + + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Demonstrating parallelization} + + \begin{figure} + \centering + \resizebox{0.72\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/04_benchmark_chapter/thread_scaling_plot.pgf}} + \caption{\boldorange{The logical dispatch algorithm unlocks + parallelization.}} + \label{fig:parallel} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Summary Comparison} + + Benefits of logical dispatch + + \begin{enumerate} + \item faster + \item allows parallelization + \item more accessible + \begin{itemize} + \item simpler algorithm / easier to understand + \item does not require an external solver + \end{itemize} + \end{enumerate} + + \pause + + \begin{block}{Next up:} + Modeling-to-generative alternatives (MGA) --- addressing structural uncertainty. + \end{block} + +\end{frame} + +\subsection{N-Dimensional \gls{mga}} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{What is \gls{mga}?} + + \begin{columns} + \column[t]{3.5cm} + \begin{block}{The \gls{mga} Idea} + \begin{enumerate}[<+->] + \item There may be appealing solutions in a model's inferior + space due to \boldorange{structural uncertainty}. + \item We \boldorange{relax the objective function} by a fixed \% + \item Then efficiently sample sub-optimal space by looking for + \boldorange{``maximally different solutions''} \cite{decarolis_using_2011}. + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} + % \pause + \column[t]{7cm} + \begin{figure} + \centering + % \resizebox{!}{0.6\textheight}{\input{../docs/figures/04_benchmark_chapter/naive_mga_lp.pgf}} + \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/04_benchmark_chapter/naive_mga_lp.pgf}} + \caption{Simple \gls{mga} procedure.} + \end{figure} + \end{columns} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{MGA in \gls{osier}} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \resizebox{0.75\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/04_benchmark_chapter/osier_mga_subset_01.pgf}} + \caption{Pareto front and sub-optimal space for MGA in \gls{osier}. This is the same problem from Figure \ref{fig:osier-temoa-benchmark}.} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{N-Dimensional \gls{mga}} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/03_osier_chapter/mga-fft-example.pgf}} + \caption{\gls{osier} addresses persistent structural uncertainty by + extending \gls{mga} to N-dimensions and sampling the near optimal space + with a farthest-first-traversal.} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} + + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Recap \#1} + + So far we have seen two technical improvements to \gls{osier} + % \newline + + \begin{enumerate} + \item A new dispatch algorithm and + \item an improved \gls{mga} algorithm. + \end{enumerate} + + % \newline + These methods relate to generating solutions. But how should we evaluate + solutions? + + % \newline + In the next section, I demonstrate \gls{osier} by analyzing nuclear fuel cycle options + and introducing a method to select a ``high compromise'' solution. +\end{frame} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/03-osier-demonstration.tex b/pres/03-osier-demonstration.tex new file mode 100644 index 0000000..66fec48 --- /dev/null +++ b/pres/03-osier-demonstration.tex @@ -0,0 +1,142 @@ +\section{\gls{osier} for Nuclear Fuel Cycle Analysis} + +\subsection{Framing Questions} +\begin{frame} + \begin{block}{Current challenges} + \begin{enumerate}[<+->] + \item Addressing climate change and data center demand will require a + lot of new infrastructure. + \item Nuclear infrastructure is needed + \cite{julie_kozeracki_pathways_2024}. + \item \textbf{How can we determine the ``best'' mix of new + infrastructure?} + \item \textbf{How can we decide on a fuel cycle to support new + reactors?} + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} + \pause + \begin{block}{Current practice} + Use energy system optimization models (ESOMs) to identify the mix of + resources that minimizes total system cost. + \end{block} +\end{frame} + +\subsection{SET Tool History and Methodology} +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Identifying promising fuel cycles} + \begin{block}{Which fuel cycle should the U.S. pursue?} + In 2011, the U.S. \Gls{DOE} commissioned the Nuclear Fuel Cycle + Evaluation and Screening Study (``the Study''). + \end{block} + \pause + \begin{block}{How were recommendations made?} + % \begin{itemize} + \begin{itemize}[<+->] + \item Thousands of fuel cycle options were filtered into 40 + ``evaluation groups'' (e.g., ``EG01''). + \item These evaluation groups were measured against nine metrics, + using the \gls{set}. + \end{itemize} + \end{block} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{\gls{set} Methodology} + \begin{columns} + \column[t]{3.5cm} + \begin{block}{Metrics in the \gls{set}} + \begin{enumerate} + \item Nuclear waste management + \item Proliferation risk + \item Nuclear Material security risk + \item Safety + \item Environmental impacts + \item Resource Utilization + \item Development and deployment risk + \item Institutional issues + \item Economics + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} + \column[t]{6.5cm} + \begin{figure}[htbp!] + \begin{center} + % \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/set_bin_plot.pgf}} + \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/05_examples_chapter/set_bin_plot.pgf}} + \end{center} + \caption{Binned groups for SNF+HLW activity at 100 years. + Reproduced from \cite{wigeland_nuclear_2014}.} + \label{fig:set_activity_bin} + \end{figure} + \end{columns} +\end{frame} + +\subsection{Results and Discussion} +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Analyzing fuel cycles through Pareto optimality} + + \begin{figure}[htbp!] + \begin{center} + \resizebox{0.9\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/05_examples_chapter/full_set_plot.pgf}} + \end{center} + \caption{Pareto optimal solutions for the \gls{set}.} + \label{fig:full-set-pcp} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{High Tradeoff (``Knee'') Solution} + % a comment + + \begin{figure}[htbp!] + \begin{center} + \resizebox{0.9\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/05_examples_chapter/single-eg_set_plot.pgf}} + \end{center} + \caption{EG04 minimizes tradeoff across all objectives and evaluation groups.} + \label{fig:single-eg-pcp} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Differences between \gls{set} and \gls{osier}} + \begin{table} + \centering + \caption{Summary of non-optimal solutions and disagreement. Highlighted + rows indicate disagreement between \Gls{osier} and \Gls{set} results.} + \label{tab:non-optimal-subset} + \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/tables/non-optimal-subset.tex}} + \end{table} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Sources of disagreement between \gls{osier} and \gls{set}} + \begin{columns} + \column[t]{3.5cm} + \begin{enumerate} + \item Data binning is lossy. + \item Reliance on expert judgement for metric values and + weights. + \end{enumerate} + \pause + \column[t]{6.5cm} + \begin{figure}[htbp!] + \begin{center} + \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/05_examples_chapter/set_bin_plot.pgf}} + % \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{./figures/set_bin_plot.pgf}} + \end{center} + \caption{Binned groups for SNF+HLW activity at 100 years. + Reproduced from \cite{wigeland_nuclear_2014}.} + \label{fig:set_activity_bin2} + \end{figure} + \end{columns} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{How does this enhance justice?} + \begin{enumerate}[<+->] + \item The recommendations from the \gls{set} were made based on expert + technical input. + \item Public stakeholders can express preferences about metrics. + \item Including diverse perspectives to analyze tradeoffs enhances + procedural and recognition justice. + \end{enumerate} +\end{frame} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/04-motivating-interlude.tex b/pres/04-motivating-interlude.tex new file mode 100644 index 0000000..32cbcbd --- /dev/null +++ b/pres/04-motivating-interlude.tex @@ -0,0 +1,56 @@ +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Recap \#2} + \begin{itemize} + \item We have seen methods to narrow the options to evaluate, \gls{mga} and ``high tradeoff'' points, + \item If \gls{osier} can generate a set of solutions, \boldorange{how should the + ultimate solution be chosen}? + \end{itemize} +\end{frame} + +\section{Interlude: Motivating the Case Study} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Limitations to Modeling Justice} + We cannot assume that a ``high tradeoff'' point will be the collective preference because of Arrow's Theorem. + \pause + \begin{block}{Arrow's Impossibility Theorem} + It is impossible to construct a utility function + that maps individual preferences onto a global preference + order without imposition or dictating \cite{arrow_difficulty_1950,franssen_arrows_2005}. + \end{block} + \pause + \begin{block}{Consequences of Arrow's Theorem} + \begin{enumerate}[<+->] + \item There is no one-size-fits-all method for public engagement or + decision-making. + \item Aggregated metrics can never adequately capture ``just outcomes'' --- + this would imply a utility function. + \item Participatory processes must include a deliberative element to evaluate + tradeoffs. + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Addressing the ``Human Dimension''} + In order for \gls{osier}, or any \gls{esom}, to address the ``human dimension'' of energy systems it must + \begin{enumerate}[<+->] + \item enable bespoke and contextualized modeling, + \item generate many solutions, + \item facilitate dialogue about the tradeoffs among solutions + \end{enumerate} + +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Case study objectives} + + \begin{block}{Research Questions} + \begin{enumerate}[<+->] + \item How, and to what extent, do decision-makers use \glspl{esom} to inform policies? + \item How do decision-makers consider equity and justice in policy design? + \item How do practitioners perceive \gls{osier}'s usefulness? + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} + +\end{frame} diff --git a/pres/05-bucket-02.tex b/pres/05-bucket-02.tex new file mode 100644 index 0000000..515d277 --- /dev/null +++ b/pres/05-bucket-02.tex @@ -0,0 +1,266 @@ +\section{Energy Justice and Modeling in Illinois} + +\subsection{Background} + + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Background} + + \begin{columns} + \column[t]{2.5cm} + \begin{figure} + \centering + % \resizebox{!}{0.8\textheight}{\input{../docs/figures/07_interview_chapter/illinois_plot.pgf}} + \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/07_interview_chapter/illinois_plot.pgf}} + \caption{Illinois and selected municipalities.} + \label{fig:illinois} + \end{figure} + \column[t]{7.5cm} + \begin{block}{Why Illinois?} + \begin{enumerate}[<+->] + \item Illinois is among the most ambitious states for shifting + to clean energy. + \item Illinois has the most nuclear plants. + \item Illinois has a variety of mechanisms for energy choice. + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} + \begin{block}{Why these municipalities?} + The chosen municipalities cover the range of energy choice options + within Illinois. + \begin{itemize}[<+->] + \item Champaign + \item Urbana + \item \gls{uiuc} + \item Naperville + \end{itemize} + \end{block} + \end{columns} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Energy Market Deregulation} + \begin{block}{History} + In 1997, Illinois legislators passed the ``Electric service customer choice and rate relief law'' + which restructured Illinois utilities (water, gas, electricity) \cite{illinois_90th_general_assembly_electric_1997}. + \end{block} + \pause + \begin{block}{Result} + \begin{enumerate}[<+->] + \item Investor-owned utilities (Ameren/ComEd) can no longer own generating capacity AND distribution (i.e., wires). + \item Illinois legislature can no longer direct utilities to build or retire specific units. + \item Consumers have more ``choice'' in electricity procurement. + \item Municipally-owned and co-op utilities are exempt from this law. + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Energy Procurement in Illinois} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \includegraphics[height=0.8\textheight]{../docs/figures/07_interview_chapter/illinois-electric-choice.png} + \caption{Flow chart describing how customers receive electricity in Illinois.} + \label{fig:illinois-flow-chart} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{General Energy Procurement in Illinois} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \includegraphics[height=0.8\textheight]{images/generic-electric-choice.png} + % \caption{Flow chart describing how customers receive electricity in Illinois.} + % \label{fig:illinois-flow-chart} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Energy Choice in Champaign/Urbana} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \includegraphics[height=0.8\textheight]{images/chambana-electric-choice.png} + % \caption{Flow chart describing how customers receive electricity in Illinois.} + % \label{fig:illinois-flow-chart} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Energy Choice in Naperville} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \includegraphics[height=0.8\textheight]{images/naperville-electric-choice.png} + % \caption{Flow chart describing how customers receive electricity in Illinois.} + % \label{fig:illinois-flow-chart} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Energy Choice at UIUC} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \includegraphics[height=0.8\textheight]{images/uiuc-electric-choice.png} + % \caption{Flow chart describing how customers receive electricity in Illinois.} + % \label{fig:illinois-flow-chart} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} + +\subsection{Methodology} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Methodology} + + + \begin{columns} + \column[t]{3.33cm} + \begin{block}{Interviews and selection} + \begin{itemize}[<+->] + \item Conducted 13 interviews with experts and practitioners. + \item Selected through purposive and snowball sampling + \item Semi-structured interiews with an interview guide. + \end{itemize} + \end{block} + \pause + \column[t]{3.33cm} + \begin{block}{Transcription and Analysis} + \begin{itemize}[<+->] + \item Interviews were transcribed with the ``listen and revise'' + method \cite{battaglia_listen_2024}. + \item Initial coding performed with \texttt{Taguette} + \cite{rampin_taguette_2021}. + \item Codes were iteratively developed into themes + \cite{braun_using_2006}. + \end{itemize} + \end{block} + \pause + \column[t]{3.33cm} + \begin{block}{Supplemental Document Review} + Supplemental documents (where relevant) include + \begin{itemize}[<+->] + \item Climate action/sustainability plans + \item Statutes + \end{itemize} + \end{block} + \end{columns} +\end{frame} + +\subsection{Results} +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Research Question \#1: How much are \glspl{esom} used?} + \begin{block}{State Level} + \begin{enumerate} + \item Used by the IPA for procurement plans + \item Typically contracted to third parties + \item Limited by: Deregulation of Illinois utilities + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} + \pause + \begin{block}{Municipal Level} + Barriers and limitations: + \begin{enumerate} + \item Lack of expertise + \item Lack of staff capacity + \item Structural barriers (e.g., resource ownership) + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} +\end{frame} +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Research Question \#1: Continued} + \begin{block}{Who can benefit from modeling?} + \begin{enumerate}[<+->] + \item The state of Illinois (e.g., using modeling to develop energy targets). + \item Municipalities that own their own generation and/or distribution (e.g., UIUC). + \item Municipalities that are interested in behind-the-meter generation or distributed resources. + \item Non-governmental organizations interested in lobbying decision-makers (e.g., Naperville's NEST, + or the Union of Concerned Scientists.) + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} + +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{How is justice considered?} + \begin{block}{State level} + \begin{enumerate} + \item Emphasis on distributive justice (e.g., Justice-40, ``equity-eligible'' designation) + \item Some awareness of procedural justice. + \end{enumerate} + + \end{block} + \pause + \begin{block}{Municipal level} + \begin{enumerate} + \item Some municipalities have dedicated justice and equity staff, but it seems siloed from planning. + \item Energy decisions are primarily based on cost. + \item Planning processes could be more transparent (e.g., IMEA) + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} +\end{frame} + +% \begin{frame} +% \frametitle{Research Question \#2: How is justice considered?} +% \begin{block}{Key Takeaways} +% \begin{itemize}[<+->] +% \item The state of Illinois discursively considers justice. (E.g., Justice-40, ``equity-eligible'' designation) +% \item Some municipalities have dedicated justice and equity staff, but it seems siloed from planning. +% \item There is a large focus on distributive justice. +% \end{itemize} +% \end{block} +% \begin{block}{More to be done} +% \begin{enumerate} +% \item Greater process transparency is needed to facilitate procedural justice. +% \item More opportunities to integrate notions of justice into planning processes. +% \end{enumerate} +% \end{block} +% \end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Research Question \#3: How useful is \gls{osier}?} + + Despite the lack of municipal modeling, \gls{osier} was well received. + + \begin{block}{Select Quotes} + % \setbeamercovered{transparent} + % \begin{itemize}[<+,3>] + \begin{itemize} + \item \textit{[Y]ou need a tool like this in order to properly balance other + public policy objectives (Interviewee IP3).} + \item \textit{I mean this is exactly what we need, an energy model that shows us + like something other than cost... I think that is going to be infinitely + useful (Interviewee IA2).} + \item \textit{Everybody can be involved in the process and communities that don’t + have the resources to buy software can do this themselves (Interviewee UP2).} + \end{itemize} + \end{block} +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Research Question \#3: How useful is \gls{osier}?} + Interviewees were impressed by three main things. + \begin{enumerate}[<+->] + \item They appreciated that \gls{osier} could model objectives besides cost. + \item They felt that \gls{osier} could be useful for communicating with decision-makers and constituents. + \item They thought \gls{osier} could enhance participation. + \end{enumerate} + +\end{frame} + +\subsection{Discussion} +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Discussion} + + \begin{block}{Key Takeaways} + \begin{enumerate} + \item There are a variety of structural barriers to modeling at the municipal level. + \item Justice is seldom considered as an operational imperative. + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} + \begin{block}{Recommendations} + Illinois should take steps to incorporate modeling that is + \begin{enumerate} + \item more transparent, + \item addresses multiple competing objectives, + \item co-creative with public stakeholders. + \end{enumerate} + \end{block} + +\end{frame} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/06-future-work.tex b/pres/06-future-work.tex new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d7754a3 --- /dev/null +++ b/pres/06-future-work.tex @@ -0,0 +1,43 @@ +\section{Conclusions \& Future Work} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Problems solvable with \gls{osier}} + + \begin{enumerate} + \item Deciding among nuclear reactor designs + \item Budget-constrained optimization + \item Varying scales: from individual buildings to national + \item + \end{enumerate} + +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Future Work} + + \begin{itemize} + \item Enhancements to \gls{osier} (e.g., for fuel cycle analysis, different energy markets, coupling with + other models, ...) + \item Demonstrate \gls{osier} in a participatory modeling process. + \end{itemize} +\end{frame} + + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Summary and Conclusions} + Today I showed... + \begin{enumerate} + \item Two technical improvements to the \gls{osier} tool + \item How \gls{osier} can be used to analyze nuclear fuel cycles. + \item That energy planners and decision makers understood the value of \gls{osier}. + \item That \gls{osier} can facilitate dialogue necessary to address procedural justice. + \end{enumerate} +\end{frame} + + +\begin{frame} + + % \big + Q\&A + +\end{frame} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/07-backup-slides.tex b/pres/07-backup-slides.tex new file mode 100644 index 0000000..dcf4913 --- /dev/null +++ b/pres/07-backup-slides.tex @@ -0,0 +1,156 @@ +\begin{frame} + Backup Slides +\end{frame} + + +% Types of Justice + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Distributive} + \begin{columns} + \column[t]{3cm} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{ + \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] + \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] \tikzstyle{vertex} = + [circle, draw=black, fill=trueilliniorange] + \tikzstyle{unfocus} = [circle, draw=gray, fill=illiniorange] + \tikzstyle{hidden} = [draw=none] \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, + very thick] + + \node[vertex](v3) at (0,2) + {\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Distribution}}}; + \node[unfocus](v2) at (0,0) + {\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Procedural}}}; \node[unfocus](v1) + at (0,-2) {\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Recognition}}}; + + \end{tikzpicture}} + \end{figure} + \column[t]{7cm} + \begin{block}{Distributive Justice} + Related to the distribution of burdens and benefits. + \end{block} + \begin{block}{Normative Question} + What is the fairest way to distribute benefits and burdens? + \end{block} + \begin{block}{Examples of injustice} + \begin{itemize} + \item Dispossession of land and benefits + \cite{yenneti_spatial_2016,sovacool_dispossessed_2021}. + \item Poorer air quality around fossil fuel plants --- primarily + located in poorer communities \cite{mohai_which_2015}. + \item Solar panel subsidies and installations benefitting + wealthier communities \cite{reames_distributional_2020}. + \end{itemize} + \end{block} + \end{columns} + +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Procedural} + \begin{columns} + \column[t]{3cm} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{ + \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] + \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] \tikzstyle{vertex} = + [circle, draw=black, fill=trueilliniorange] + \tikzstyle{unfocus} = [circle, draw=gray, fill=illiniorange] + \tikzstyle{hidden} = [draw=none] \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, + very thick] + + \node[unfocus](v3) at (0,2) + {\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Distribution}}}; \node[vertex](v2) + at (0,0) {\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Procedural}}}; + \node[unfocus](v1) at (0,-2) + {\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Recognition}}}; + + \end{tikzpicture}} + \end{figure} + \column[t]{7cm} + \begin{block}{Procedural Justice} + Related to decision-making processes --- method and inclusion. + \end{block} + \begin{block}{Normative Question} + What is the fairest way to make decisions affecting specific groups + of people? + \end{block} + \begin{block}{Examples of injustice} + \begin{itemize} + \item Dismissal of testimony for its lack of technical expertise + \cite{johnson_dakota_2021}. + \item Lack of transparency in decision making. + \end{itemize} + \end{block} + \end{columns} + +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Recognition} + \begin{columns} + \column[t]{3cm} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{ + \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] + \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] \tikzstyle{vertex} = + [circle, draw=black, fill=trueilliniorange] + \tikzstyle{unfocus} = [circle, draw=gray, fill=illiniorange] + \tikzstyle{hidden} = [draw=none] \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, + very thick] + + \node[unfocus](v3) at (0,2) + {\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Distribution}}}; + \node[unfocus](v2) at (0,0) + {\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Procedural}}}; \node[vertex](v1) + at (0,-2) {\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Recognition}}}; + + \end{tikzpicture}} + \end{figure} + \column[t]{7cm} + \begin{block}{Recognition Justice} + Related to social value of people or groups derived from + relationships, laws, and cultural standing. + \end{block} + \begin{block}{Normative Question} + How much and in what ways should a person or group of people be + valued? + \end{block} + \begin{block}{Examples of injustice} + \begin{itemize} + \item Energy policies that interfere with loving relationships + (e.g., stress from energy + insecurity) \cite{van_uffelen_revisiting_2022}. + \item Lack of labor protections for + workers \cite{van_uffelen_revisiting_2022}. + \item Exclusion from a policy process\cite{van_uffelen_revisiting_2022}. + \end{itemize} + \end{block} + \end{columns} + +\end{frame} + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Computational Resources} + + \begin{itemize} + \item Platform: 2024 MacBook Pro + \item Operating System: macOS Sequoia 15.5 + \item Memory: 48 GB + \item CPU: M4 Pro (10 performance cores, 4 efficiency cores) + \end{itemize} +\end{frame} + + +\begin{frame} + \frametitle{Solution highlighting} + \begin{figure} + \centering + \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/04_benchmark_chapter/4_obj_objective_space_total_cost.pgf}} + \caption{The five solutions with the lowest lifecycle CO2 emissions.} + \end{figure} +\end{frame} diff --git a/pres/2023-dotson-prelim-pres.tex b/pres/2025-dotson-defense.tex similarity index 89% rename from pres/2023-dotson-prelim-pres.tex rename to pres/2025-dotson-defense.tex index 29eb441..dfd163a 100644 --- a/pres/2023-dotson-prelim-pres.tex +++ b/pres/2025-dotson-defense.tex @@ -3,17 +3,17 @@ % -%\documentclass[11pt,handout]{beamer} +% \documentclass[9pt,handout]{beamer} \documentclass[9pt]{beamer} \usetheme[white]{Illinois} %\title[short title]{long title} \title[Short Title]{Towards a Holistic Integration of Energy Justice and Energy System Engineering} %\subtitle[short subtitle]{long subtitle} -\subtitle[Short SubTitle]{Preliminary Exam} +\subtitle[Short SubTitle]{Thesis Defense} %\author[short name]{long name} \author[Your Name]{Samuel G. Dotson\\Advanced Reactors and Fuel Cycles Group} %\date[short date]{long date} -\date[01.09.2024]{January 9, 2024} +\date[10.23.2025]{October 23, 2025} %\institution[short name]{long name} \institute[UIUC]{University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign} @@ -30,6 +30,8 @@ \usepackage{tikz} \usepackage{soul} \usepackage{pgfplots} +\usepackage[table, dvipsnames]{xcolor} + \definecolor{LightGray}{gray}{0.9} @@ -103,14 +105,17 @@ %Those icons in the references are terrible looking \setbeamertemplate{bibliography item}[text] \setbeamertemplate{caption}[numbered] +% \beamerdefaultoverlayspecification{<+->} \newcommand{\mathdefault}[1][]{} %%%% Acronym support -% \usepackage[acronym,toc]{glossaries} +\usepackage[acronym,toc]{glossaries} +\include{acros} % \usepackage{acronym} -% \input{../docs/acros} +% \newcommand{\acro}[3]{\acrodef{#1}[#2]{#3}} + % \makeglossaries @@ -163,29 +168,21 @@ \end{frame} } -\section{Introduction} -\input{00-overview.tex} -\section{Motivation and Background} -\input{motivation/00-motivation.tex} -% \section{Technical Gap \#1} -% \input{tech-gaps/01-gap.tex} -% \section{Proposal \#1} -% \input{proposal/norm-premise.tex} -% \section{Tale of Three Uncertainties} -% \input{uncertainty/00-uncertainty.tex} -% \section{Technical Gap \#3} -% \input{tech-gaps/03-gap.tex} -% \input{proposal/case-study.tex} - -% \section{Conclusion} -% \input{conclusion} -% \input{acks} +\input{01-introduction.tex} +\input{02-bucket-01.tex} +\input{03-osier-demonstration.tex} +\input{04-motivating-interlude.tex} +\input{05-bucket-02.tex} +\input{06-future-work.tex} +\input{acks} +\input{07-backup-slides.tex} + %%--------------------------------%% %%--------------------------------%% \begin{frame}[allowframebreaks] \frametitle{References} \bibliographystyle{plain} - {\footnotesize \bibliography{../docs/2023-dotson-prelim.bib} } + {\footnotesize \bibliography{../docs/2025-dotson-phd.bib} } \end{frame} diff --git a/pres/2025-dotson-defense.vrb b/pres/2025-dotson-defense.vrb new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a450425 --- /dev/null +++ b/pres/2025-dotson-defense.vrb @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +\frametitle{User defined objectives} + % \scriptsize + \begin{minted}[ frame=lines, framesep=2mm, baselinestretch=1.2, bgcolor=LightGray, +fontsize=\footnotesize, linenos ]{python} + + nuclear.readiness = 9 + fusion.readiness = 3 + + technology_list = [nuclear, fusion] + + def osier_objective(technology_list, solved_dispatch_model): + """ + Calculate the capacity-weighted technology readiness + score for this energy mix. + """ + + total_capacity = np.array([t.capacity for t in technology_list]).sum() + + objective_value = np.array([t.readiness*t.capacity + for t in technology_list]).sum() + + return objective_value / total_capacity + \end{minted} diff --git a/pres/Makefile b/pres/Makefile index 390f872..9cfe1f2 100644 --- a/pres/Makefile +++ b/pres/Makefile @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -manuscript = 2023-dotson-prelim-pres +manuscript = 2025-dotson-defense references = $(wildcard *.bib) latexopt = -halt-on-error -file-line-error -shell-escape diff --git a/pres/acks.tex b/pres/acks.tex index ef85ea4..4149c25 100644 --- a/pres/acks.tex +++ b/pres/acks.tex @@ -1,6 +1,12 @@ \begin{frame} \frametitle{Acknowledgement} - Acknowledgements should include both people who helped and funding - streams. If you are funded by an NEUP grant, that number usually goes - here. . + This work was supported in part by + \begin{itemize} + \item The Nuclear Regulatory Commission Fellowship Program + \item The Felix T. Adler Fellowship from the NPRE Department at UIUC + \item The Union of Concerned Scientists Professional Development Fund + \end{itemize} + + I also thank the members of the Advanced Reactors and Fuel Cycles (ARFC) research group for + their valuable feedback and code reviews. \end{frame} diff --git a/pres/acros.tex b/pres/acros.tex new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c39ec76 --- /dev/null +++ b/pres/acros.tex @@ -0,0 +1,187 @@ +%\newacronym{<++>}{<++>}{<++>} +\newacronym[longplural={metric tons of heay metal}]{MTHM}{MTHM}{metric ton of heavy metal} +\newacronym{ABM}{ABM}{agent-based modeling} +\newacronym{ACDIS}{ACDIS}{Program in Arms Control \& Domestic and International Security} +\newacronym{AHTR}{AHTR}{Advanced High Temperature Reactor} +\newacronym{ANDRA}{ANDRA}{Agence Nationale pour la gestion des D\'echets RAdioactifs, the French National Agency for Radioactive Waste Management} +\newacronym{ANL}{ANL}{Argonne National Laboratory} +\newacronym{API}{API}{application programming interface} +\newacronym{ARE}{ARE}{Aircraft Reactor Experiment} +\newacronym{ARFC}{ARFC}{Advanced Reactors and Fuel Cycles} +\newacronym{ASME}{ASME}{American Society of Mechanical Engineers} +\newacronym{ATWS}{ATWS}{Anticipated Transient Without Scram} +\newacronym{BDBE}{BDBE}{Beyond Design Basis Event} +\newacronym{BIDS}{BIDS}{Berkeley Institute for Data Science} +\newacronym{CAFCA}{CAFCA}{ Code for Advanced Fuel Cycles Assessment } +\newacronym{CDTN}{CDTN}{Centro de Desenvolvimento da Tecnologia Nuclear} +\newacronym{CEA}{CEA}{Commissariat \`a l'\'Energie Atomique et aux \'Energies Alternatives} +\newacronym{CI}{CI}{continuous integration} +\newacronym{CNEN}{CNEN}{Comiss\~{a}o Nacional de Energia Nuclear} +\newacronym{CNERG}{CNERG}{Computational Nuclear Engineering Research Group} +\newacronym{COSI}{COSI}{Commelini-Sicard} +\newacronym{COTS}{COTS}{commercial, off-the-shelf} +\newacronym{CSNF}{CSNF}{commercial spent nuclear fuel} +\newacronym{CTAH}{CTAHs}{Coiled Tube Air Heaters} +\newacronym{CUBIT}{CUBIT}{CUBIT Geometry and Mesh Generation Toolkit} +\newacronym{CURIE}{CURIE}{Centralized Used Fuel Resource for Information Exchange} +\newacronym{DAG}{DAG}{directed acyclic graph} +\newacronym{DANESS}{DANESS}{Dynamic Analysis of Nuclear Energy System Strategies} +\newacronym{DBE}{DBE}{Design Basis Event} +\newacronym{DESAE}{DESAE}{Dynamic Analysis of Nuclear Energy Systems Strategies} +\newacronym{DHS}{DHS}{Department of Homeland Security} +\newacronym{DOE}{DOE}{Department of Energy} +\newacronym{DRACS}{DRACS}{Direct Reactor Auxiliary Cooling System} +\newacronym{DRE}{DRE}{dynamic resource exchange} +\newacronym{DSNF}{DSNF}{DOE spent nuclear fuel} +\newacronym{DYMOND}{DYMOND}{Dynamic Model of Nuclear Development } +\newacronym{EBS}{EBS}{Engineered Barrier System} +\newacronym{EDZ}{EDZ}{Excavation Disturbed Zone} +\newacronym{EIA}{EIA}{U.S. Energy Information Administration} +\newacronym{EPA}{EPA}{Environmental Protection Agency} +\newacronym{EP}{EP}{Engineering Physics} +\newacronym{FCO}{FCO}{Fuel Cycle Options} +\newacronym{FCT}{FCT}{Fuel Cycle Technology} +\newacronym{FEHM}{FEHM}{Finite Element Heat and Mass Transfer} +\newacronym{FEPs}{FEPs}{Features, Events, and Processes} +\newacronym{FHR}{FHR}{Fluoride-Salt-Cooled High-Temperature Reactor} +\newacronym{FLiBe}{FLiBe}{Fluoride-Lithium-Beryllium} +\newacronym{GDSE}{GDSE}{Generic Disposal System Environment} +\newacronym{GDSM}{GDSM}{Generic Disposal System Model} +\newacronym{GENIUSv1}{GENIUSv1}{Global Evaluation of Nuclear Infrastructure Utilization Scenarios, Version 1} +\newacronym{GENIUSv2}{GENIUSv2}{Global Evaluation of Nuclear Infrastructure Utilization Scenarios, Version 2} +\newacronym{GENIUS}{GENIUS}{Global Evaluation of Nuclear Infrastructure Utilization Scenarios} +\newacronym{GPAM}{GPAM}{Generic Performance Assessment Model} +\newacronym{GRSAC}{GRSAC}{Graphite Reactor Severe Accident Code} +\newacronym{GUI}{GUI}{graphical user interface} +\newacronym{HLW}{HLW}{high level waste} +\newacronym{HPC}{HPC}{high-performance computing} +\newacronym{HTC}{HTC}{high-throughput computing} +\newacronym{HTGR}{HTGR}{High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor} +\newacronym{IAEA}{IAEA}{International Atomic Energy Agency} +\newacronym{IEMA}{IEMA}{Illinois Emergency Mangament Agency} +\newacronym{INL}{INL}{Idaho National Laboratory} +\newacronym{IPRR1}{IRP-R1}{Instituto de Pesquisas Radioativas Reator 1} +\newacronym{IRP}{IRP}{Integrated Research Project} +\newacronym{ISFSI}{ISFSI}{Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation} +\newacronym{ISRG}{ISRG}{Independent Student Research Group} +\newacronym{JFNK}{JFNK}{Jacobian-Free Newton Krylov} +\newacronym{LANL}{LANL}{Los Alamos National Laboratory} +\newacronym{LBNL}{LBNL}{Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory} +\newacronym{LCOE}{LCOE}{levelized cost of electricity} +\newacronym{LDRD}{LDRD}{laboratory directed research and development} +\newacronym{LFR}{LFR}{Lead-Cooled Fast Reactor} +\newacronym{LLNL}{LLNL}{Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory} +\newacronym{LMFBR}{LMFBR}{Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor} +\newacronym{LOFC}{LOFC}{Loss of Forced Cooling} +\newacronym{LOHS}{LOHS}{Loss of Heat Sink} +\newacronym{LOLA}{LOLA}{Loss of Large Area} +\newacronym{LP}{LP}{linear program} +\newacronym{MA}{MA}{minor actinide} +\newacronym{MCNP}{MCNP}{Monte Carlo N-Particle code} +\newacronym{MILP}{MILP}{mixed-integer linear program} +\newacronym{MIT}{MIT}{the Massachusetts Institute of Technology} +\newacronym{MOAB}{MOAB}{Mesh-Oriented datABase} +\newacronym{MOOSE}{MOOSE}{Multiphysics Object-Oriented Simulation Environment} +\newacronym{MOX}{MOX}{mixed oxide} +\newacronym{MSBR}{MSBR}{Molten Salt Breeder Reactor} +\newacronym{MSRE}{MSRE}{Molten Salt Reactor Experiment} +\newacronym{MSR}{MSR}{Molten Salt Reactor} +\newacronym{NAGRA}{NAGRA}{National Cooperative for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste} +\newacronym{NEAMS}{NEAMS}{Nuclear Engineering Advanced Modeling and Simulation} +\newacronym{NEUP}{NEUP}{Nuclear Energy University Programs} +\newacronym{NFCSim}{NFCSim}{Nuclear Fuel Cycle Simulator} +\newacronym{NGNP}{NGNP}{Next Generation Nuclear Plant} +\newacronym{NMWPC}{NMWPC}{Nuclear MW Per Capita} +\newacronym{NNSA}{NNSA}{National Nuclear Security Administration} +\newacronym{NPRE}{NPRE}{Department of Nuclear, Plasma, and Radiological Engineering} +\newacronym{NQA1}{NQA-1}{Nuclear Quality Assurance - 1} +\newacronym{NRC}{NRC}{Nuclear Regulatory Commission} +\newacronym{NSF}{NSF}{National Science Foundation} +\newacronym{NSSC}{NSSC}{Nuclear Science and Security Consortium} +\newacronym{NUWASTE}{NUWASTE}{Nuclear Waste Assessment System for Technical Evaluation} +\newacronym{NWF}{NWF}{Nuclear Waste Fund} +\newacronym{NWTRB}{NWTRB}{Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board} +\newacronym{OCRWM}{OCRWM}{Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management} +\newacronym{ORION}{ORION}{ORION} +\newacronym{ORNL}{ORNL}{Oak Ridge National Laboratory} +\newacronym{PARCS}{PARCS}{Purdue Advanced Reactor Core Simulator} +\newacronym{PBAHTR}{PB-AHTR}{Pebble Bed Advanced High Temperature Reactor} +\newacronym{PBFHR}{PB-FHR}{Pebble-Bed Fluoride-Salt-Cooled High-Temperature Reactor} +\newacronym{PEI}{PEI}{Peak Environmental Impact} +\newacronym{PH}{PRONGHORN}{PRONGHORN} +\newacronym{PRKE}{PRKE}{Point Reactor Kinetics Equations} +\newacronym{PSPG}{PSPG}{Pressure-Stabilizing/Petrov-Galerkin} +\newacronym{PWAR}{PWAR}{Pratt and Whitney Aircraft Reactor} +\newacronym{PWR}{PWR}{Pressurized Water Reactor} +\newacronym{PyNE}{PyNE}{Python toolkit for Nuclear Engineering} +\newacronym{PyRK}{PyRK}{Python for Reactor Kinetics} +\newacronym{QA}{QA}{quality assurance} +\newacronym{RDD}{RD\&D}{Research Development and Demonstration} +\newacronym{RD}{R\&D}{Research and Development} +\newacronym{RELAP}{RELAP}{Reactor Excursion and Leak Analysis Program} +\newacronym{RIA}{RIA}{Reactivity Insertion Accident} +\newacronym{RIF}{RIF}{Region-Institution-Facility} +\newacronym{SFR}{SFR}{Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor} +\newacronym{SINDAG}{SINDA{\textbackslash}G}{Systems Improved Numerical Differencing Analyzer $\backslash$ Gaski} +\newacronym{SKB}{SKB}{Svensk K\"{a}rnbr\"{a}nslehantering AB} +\newacronym{SNF}{SNF}{spent nuclear fuel} +\newacronym{SNL}{SNL}{Sandia National Laboratory} +\newacronym{STC}{STC}{specific temperature change} +\newacronym{SUPG}{SUPG}{Streamline-Upwind/Petrov-Galerkin} +\newacronym{SWF}{SWF}{Separations and Waste Forms} +\newacronym{SWU}{SWU}{Separative Work Unit} +\newacronym{TRIGA}{TRIGA}{Training Research Isotope General Atomic} +\newacronym{TRISO}{TRISO}{Tristructural Isotropic} +\newacronym{TSM}{TSM}{Total System Model} +\newacronym{TSPA}{TSPA}{Total System Performance Assessment for the Yucca Mountain License Application} +\newacronym{ThOX}{ThOX}{thorium oxide} +\newacronym{UFD}{UFD}{Used Fuel Disposition} +\newacronym{UML}{UML}{Unified Modeling Language} +\newacronym{UOX}{UOX}{uranium oxide} +\newacronym{UQ}{UQ}{uncertainty quantification} +\newacronym{US}{US}{United States} +\newacronym{UW}{UW}{University of Wisconsin} +\newacronym{VISION}{VISION}{the Verifiable Fuel Cycle Simulation Model} +\newacronym{VV}{V\&V}{verification and validation} +\newacronym{WIPP}{WIPP}{Waste Isolation Pilot Plant} +\newacronym{YMR}{YMR}{Yucca Mountain Repository Site} +\newacronym{osier}{\texttt{Osier}}{open-source multi-objective energy system framework} +\newacronym{set}{SET Tool}{Fuel Cycle Evaluation and Screening Software} +\newacronym{esom}{ESOM}{energy system optimization model} +\newacronym{temoa}{\texttt{Temoa}}{Tools for Energy Model Optimization and Analysis} +\newacronym{ga}{GA}{genetic algorithm} +\newacronym{unsga3}{U-NSGA-III}{Unified Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm} +\newacronym{nsga2}{NSGA-II}{Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II} +\newacronym{nsga3}{NSGA-III}{Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm III} +\newacronym{ec}{EC}{$\epsilon$-constraint} +\newacronym{ws}{WS}{weighted-sum} +\newacronym{moo}{MOO}{multi-objective optimization} +\newacronym{mga}{MGA}{modeling-to-generate-alternatives} +\newacronym{co2}{CO$_2$}{carbon dioxide} +\newacronym{eg}{EG}{evaluation group} +\newacronym{llw}{LLW}{low-level waste} +\newacronym{hlw}{HLW}{high-level waste} +\newacronym{du}{DU}{depleted uranium} +\newacronym{ru}{RU}{recovered uranium} +\newacronym{rth}{RTh}{recovered thorium} +\newacronym{ads}{ADS}{accelerator-driven subcritical reactor} +\newacronym{msr}{MSR}{molten salt reactor} +\newacronym{pwr}{PWR}{pressurized water reactor} +\newacronym{bwr}{BWR}{boiling water reactor} +\newacronym{lwr}{LWR}{light water reactor} +\newacronym{hwr}{HWR}{heavy-water moderated reactor} +\newacronym{htgr}{HTGR}{high temperature gas-cooled reactor} +\newacronym{sfr}{SFR}{sodium-cooled fast reactor} +\newacronym{ffh}{FFH}{fusion hybrid reactor} +\newacronym{est}{EST}{Evaluation and Screening Team} +\newacronym{foak}{FOAK}{first-of-a-kind} +\newacronym{fco}{FCO}{Fuel Cycle Options Campaign} +\newacronym{doe}{DOE}{Department of Energy} +\newacronym{lcoe}{LCOE}{levelized cost of electricity} +\newacronym{snf}{SNF}{spent-nuclear-fuel} +\newacronym{smr}{SMR}{small modular reactor} +\newacronym{mcda}{MCDA}{multi-criteria decision analysis} +\newacronym{uiuc}{UIUC}{University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign} +\newacronym{ccs}{CCS}{carbon-capture and storage} +\newacronym{ai}{AI}{artificial intelligence} +\newacronym{vre}{VRE}{variable renewable energy} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/images/chambana-electric-choice.png b/pres/images/chambana-electric-choice.png new file mode 100644 index 0000000..cfc649f Binary files /dev/null and b/pres/images/chambana-electric-choice.png differ diff --git a/pres/images/generic-electric-choice.png b/pres/images/generic-electric-choice.png new file mode 100644 index 0000000..faae7b8 Binary files /dev/null and b/pres/images/generic-electric-choice.png differ diff --git a/pres/images/naperville-choice.png b/pres/images/naperville-choice.png new file mode 100644 index 0000000..7de4789 Binary files /dev/null and b/pres/images/naperville-choice.png differ diff --git a/pres/images/naperville-electric-choice.png b/pres/images/naperville-electric-choice.png new file mode 100644 index 0000000..9dbebaa Binary files /dev/null and b/pres/images/naperville-electric-choice.png differ diff --git a/pres/images/osier_constraint.png b/pres/images/osier_constraint.png new file mode 100644 index 0000000..2d61032 Binary files /dev/null and b/pres/images/osier_constraint.png differ diff --git a/pres/images/osier_dispatch_example.png b/pres/images/osier_dispatch_example.png new file mode 100644 index 0000000..53b85d3 Binary files /dev/null and b/pres/images/osier_dispatch_example.png differ diff --git a/pres/images/uiuc-electric-choice.png b/pres/images/uiuc-electric-choice.png new file mode 100644 index 0000000..f7a0073 Binary files /dev/null and b/pres/images/uiuc-electric-choice.png differ diff --git a/pres/motivation/00-motivation.tex b/pres/motivation/00-motivation.tex deleted file mode 100644 index 7c6ffe0..0000000 --- a/pres/motivation/00-motivation.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1 +0,0 @@ -\input{motivation/02-motivation.tex} diff --git a/pres/motivation/02-motivation.tex b/pres/motivation/02-motivation.tex deleted file mode 100644 index 515e205..0000000 --- a/pres/motivation/02-motivation.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,626 +0,0 @@ -\subsection{Observations} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{The Challenge at Hand} - \begin{block}{Purpose of Energy System Modeling} - Modeling allows us to make predictions, test hypotheses, and understand - counterintuitive behavior.\\~\\ - \textit{Models inform energy policy with prescriptive analyses - \cite{decarolis_using_2011}.} - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Problem} % But, models are limited. Quantitative models are - % especially limited in their ability to describe the ``human dimension.'' - Policies affect people --- energy systems models cannot adequately - capture the ``human dimension'' \cite{pfenninger_energy_2014}. - \end{block} - \begin{block}{What is the ``human dimension?''} - \begin{enumerate} - \item People have preferences about their sources of energy that are - ignored. - \item Models cannot describe policy outcomes related to fairness or - justice. - \end{enumerate} - \end{block} -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Three tenets of justice} - \begin{figure} - \centering - % \resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{ - \begin{tikzpicture} - \begin{scope}[blend group = soft light] - % \fill[red!30!white] ( 90:1.2) circle (2); - \fill[illiniorange] ( 90:1.2) circle (2); - % \fill[green!30!white] (210:1.2) circle (2); - \fill[illiniorange] (210:1.2) circle (2); - % \fill[blue!30!white] (330:1.2) circle (2); - \fill[illiniorange] (330:1.2) circle (2); - \end{scope} - \node at ( 90:2) {Recognition}; - \node at ( 210:2) {Distribution}; - \node at ( 330:2) {Procedural}; - \node[font=\Large] {\textcolor{black}{Justice}}; - \end{tikzpicture} - - % } - \caption{Three aspects of justice \cite{schlosberg_1_2007}.} - \end{figure} -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Distributional} - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{3cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{ - \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] - \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] \tikzstyle{vertex} = - [circle, draw=black, fill=trueilliniorange] - \tikzstyle{unfocus} = [circle, draw=gray, fill=illiniorange] - \tikzstyle{hidden} = [draw=none] \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, - very thick] - - \node[vertex](v3) at (0,2) - {\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Distribution}}}; - \node[unfocus](v2) at (0,0) - {\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Procedural}}}; \node[unfocus](v1) - at (0,-2) {\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Recognition}}}; - - \end{tikzpicture}} - \end{figure} - \column[t]{7cm} - \begin{block}{Distributional Justice} - Related to the distribution of burdens and benefits. - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Normative Question} - What is the fairest way to distribute benefits and burdens? - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Examples of injustice} - \begin{itemize} - \item Dispossession of land and benefits - \cite{yenneti_spatial_2016,sovacool_dispossessed_2021}. - \item Poorer air quality around fossil fuel plants --- primarily - located in poorer communities \cite{mohai_which_2015}. - \item Solar panel subsidies and installations benefitting - wealthier communities \cite{reames_distributional_2020}. - \end{itemize} - \end{block} - \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Procedural} - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{3cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{ - \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] - \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] \tikzstyle{vertex} = - [circle, draw=black, fill=trueilliniorange] - \tikzstyle{unfocus} = [circle, draw=gray, fill=illiniorange] - \tikzstyle{hidden} = [draw=none] \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, - very thick] - - \node[unfocus](v3) at (0,2) - {\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Distribution}}}; \node[vertex](v2) - at (0,0) {\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Procedural}}}; - \node[unfocus](v1) at (0,-2) - {\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Recognition}}}; - - \end{tikzpicture}} - \end{figure} - \column[t]{7cm} - \begin{block}{Procedural Justice} - Related to decision-making processes --- method and inclusion. - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Normative Question} - What is the fairest way to make decisions affecting specific groups - of people? - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Examples of injustice} - \begin{itemize} - \item Dismissal of testimony for its lack of technical expertise - \cite{johnson_dakota_2021}. - \item Lack of transparency in decision making. - \end{itemize} - \end{block} - \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Recognitional} - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{3cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{ - \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] - \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] \tikzstyle{vertex} = - [circle, draw=black, fill=trueilliniorange] - \tikzstyle{unfocus} = [circle, draw=gray, fill=illiniorange] - \tikzstyle{hidden} = [draw=none] \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, - very thick] - - \node[unfocus](v3) at (0,2) - {\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Distribution}}}; - \node[unfocus](v2) at (0,0) - {\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Procedural}}}; \node[vertex](v1) - at (0,-2) {\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Recognition}}}; - - \end{tikzpicture}} - \end{figure} - \column[t]{7cm} - \begin{block}{Recognitional Justice} - Related to social value of people or groups derived from - relationships, laws, and cultural standing. - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Normative Question} - How much and in what ways should a person or group of people be - valued? - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Examples of injustice} - \begin{itemize} - \item Energy policies that interfere with loving relationships - (e.g., stress from energy - insecurity) \cite{van_uffelen_revisiting_2022}. - \item Lack of labor protections for - workers \cite{van_uffelen_revisiting_2022}. - \item Exclusion from a policy process\cite{van_uffelen_revisiting_2022}. - \end{itemize} - \end{block} - \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Climate change highlights energy system injustices} - - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{5cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/mauna-loa-co2.pgf}} - \caption{Observed increase in CO$_2$ levels at Mauna Loa Observatory - \cite{kane_atmospheric_1996}.} - \label{figure:mauna-loa} - \end{figure} - - \column[t]{5cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/emissions-by-source.pgf}} - \caption{Lifecycle carbon emissions by energy source - \cite{united_nations_economic_commission_for_europe_carbon_2022}.} - \label{figure:energy-emissions} - \end{figure} - \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Addressing climate change?} - - \begin{block}{Energy Transition} - \begin{enumerate} - \item Requires new, low carbon, energy projects. - \item Adhering to values of democracy necessitates local support - for these projects. - \end{enumerate} - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Public Opposition --- it's not NIMBY} - Perceptions of fairness and inclusion, rather than NIMBY attitudes, - condition local support - \cite{konisky_proximity_2021,aitken_why_2010,stokes_prevalence_2023,firestone_public_2012-1}. - \end{block} - \begin{block}{} - Public testimony can be dismissed for being non-technical - \cite{johnson_dakota_2021}. Existing energy planning processes and - new energy projects (even ``clean energy'' projects) reproduce - existing sociopolitical structures that violate principles of - justice. - \end{block} -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Energy Modeling and Distributional Justice} - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{3cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{ - \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] - \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] \tikzstyle{vertex} = - [circle, draw=black, fill=trueilliniorange] - \tikzstyle{unfocus} = [circle, draw=gray, fill=illiniorange] - \tikzstyle{hidden} = [draw=none] \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, - very thick] - - \node[vertex](v3) at (0,2) - {\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Distribution}}}; - \node[unfocus](v2) at (0,0) - {\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Procedural}}}; \node[unfocus](v1) - at (0,-2) {\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Recognition}}}; - - \end{tikzpicture}} - \end{figure} - \column[t]{7cm} - \begin{block}{ESOMs and Distributional Justice} - ESOM literature has begun considering distributional justice - \cite{neumann_near-optimal_2021,sasse_distributional_2019,obrecht_integrating_2020}. - \end{block} - \begin{block}{} - \begin{itemize} - \item Quantifiable - \item ``Objective'' --- research questions can be purely - descriptive. - \end{itemize} - \end{block} - \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Energy Modeling and Procedural/Recognition Justice} - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{3cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{0.7\columnwidth}{!}{ - \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] - \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] \tikzstyle{vertex} = - [circle, draw=black, fill=trueilliniorange] - \tikzstyle{unfocus} = [circle, draw=gray, fill=illiniorange] - \tikzstyle{hidden} = [draw=none] \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, - very thick] - - \node[unfocus](v3) at (0,2){\textcolor{gray}{\textbf{Distribution}}}; - \node[vertex](v2) at (0,0) {\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Procedural}}}; - \node[vertex](v1) at (0,-2){\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Recognition}}}; - - \end{tikzpicture}} - \end{figure} - \column[t]{7cm} - \begin{block}{Procedural Justice} - ESOM literature now emphasizes code and data transparency - \cite{decarolis_formalizing_2017} and highlights the importance of - producing \textit{insight} rather than \textit{answers} - \cite{decarolis_using_2011}. - \end{block} - \begin{block}{} - However, the literature does not consider the ways its methods - inform policies. Do energy system models make this more transparent or less? - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Recognition Justice} - As a corrolary of its lack of self-awareness, the ESOM literature - does not address recognition justice at all --- modeling is - independent from public influence. - \end{block} - \begin{block}{} - How inclusive is energy modeling of community preferences? - \end{block} - \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - - -% \begin{frame} \frametitle{How does modeling contribute to justice issues?} - -% \begin{block}{Question 2} -% How does energy modeling contribute to this problem [of public opposition to energy projects]? -% \end{block} -% \end{frame} - -% \begin{frame} \frametitle{How does modeling contribute to justice issues?} - -% \begin{block}{Question 2} -% How does energy modeling contribute to \st{this problem [of public opposition to energy projects]}? -% \hspace{2.5cm} violations of procedural/recognition justice? -% \end{block} -% \end{frame} - -\subsection{Background: Energy system models} -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Why ESOMs struggle with the ``human dimension''} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{0.8\columnwidth}{!}{ - \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] - \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] - \tikzstyle{vertex} = [circle, draw=black] - \tikzstyle{hidden} = [draw=none] - \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, very thick] - - \node[vertex, fill=LightGray](v1) at (0,5) {\textbf{Normative}}; - \node[vertex, fill=illiniblue](v2) at (4,0) {\textbf{Structural}}; - \node[vertex, fill=blue2](v3) at (-4,0) {\textbf{Parametric}}; - - \draw[edge] (v1) -- (v2); - \draw[edge] (v2) -- (v3); - \draw[edge] (v1) -- (v3); - - % hidden nodes for v1 - \node[hidden](h1) at (-0.75, 5) {}; - \node[hidden](h2) at (0.75, 5) {}; - - % hidden nodes for v2 - \node[hidden](h3) at (4, 0.75) {}; - \node[hidden](h4) at (4, -0.7) {}; - - % hidden nodes for v3 - \node[hidden](h5) at (-4, -0.7) {}; - \node[hidden](h6) at (-4, 0.75) {}; - - \draw[draw=none] (h4) -- (h5) node[anchor=mid, midway, sloped]{\textbf{Descriptive}}; - \draw[draw=none] (h6) -- (h1) node[anchor=mid, midway, sloped]{\textbf{Pre-descriptive}}; - \draw[draw=none] (h2) -- (h3) node[anchor=mid, midway, sloped]{\textbf{Prescriptive}}; - - % objectivity scale - \node[hidden](u1) at (-6,5) {\textbf{Epistemic}}; - \node[hidden](u2) at (-6,0) {\textbf{Aleatory}}; - \draw[edge] (u1) -- (u2); - - - % objectivity scale - \node[hidden](u1) at (6,5) {\textbf{Subjective}}; - \node[hidden](u2) at (6,0) {\textbf{Objective}}; \draw[edge] - (u1) -- (u2); - - - \end{tikzpicture} - } - \caption{A summary of three uncertainties and their interactions. Note: Shading does not indicate a rigorous comparison.} - \end{figure} -\end{frame} - -% talk about how esoms currently work -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Energy System Optimization Models (ESOMs)} - - \begin{block}{Formulation} - ESOMs consist of: - \begin{itemize} - \item A set of decision variables - \item ``An economic objective'' \cite{hobbs_optimization_1995} - \item A set of constraints - \end{itemize} - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Solution method} - Linear programming (LP) / mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) - \end{block} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Simple Example Linear Program} - - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{4cm} - \begin{block}{Decision variables} - Determine the mix of energy sources... - \begin{align} - \mathbf{X} = {\mathrm{x}_1, \mathrm{x}_2 \mid \mathrm{x} \in \mathbf{R}+} - \end{align} - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Objective} - ...that minimizes total cost... - \begin{align} - \mathrm{min}\left(\mathrm{c}_1\mathrm{x}_1 + \mathrm{c}_2\mathrm{x}_2\right) - \end{align} - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Constraint} - ...such that energy demand is always met. - \begin{align} - \mathrm{x}_1 + \mathrm{x}_2 = 1 - \end{align} - \end{block} - \column[t]{6cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{images/simple_esom_lp.pgf}} - \caption{Solving a simple linear program by inspection.} - \label{fig:simple-lp} - \end{figure} - - \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - -\input{uncertainty/01-parametric01.tex} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Considering Parametric Uncertainty in a Linear Program} - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{10cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{0.75\columnwidth}{!}{\input{images/parametric_uc_lp.pgf}} - \caption{Solving a simple linear program by inspection.} - \label{fig:param-uc} - \end{figure} - \end{columns} -\end{frame} - -\input{uncertainty/02-structural01.tex} - -\input{tech-gaps/02-gap.tex} - -% \section{Methodology} -\input{proposal/osier.tex} - -% -\section{Motivation and Background II} -\subsection{Cognitive Myopia} -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{What's still missing?} - - Despite awareness of structural and parametric uncertainties modelers still - don't address - \begin{itemize} - \item How parameter distributions are chosen? - \item Why are certain objectives chosen (why should an economic - objective be \textit{assumed})? - \item If structural uncertainty is addressed by presenting mutliple solutions, - how should society choose among those alternatives? - \item What motivated the specified set of decision variables (why are - technologies included/excluded)? - \item How can members of the public adequately deliberate on issues perceived - by experts as highly technical? - \end{itemize} - - This alludes to another kind of uncertainty... -\end{frame} - -\input{uncertainty/03-normative01.tex} - -\subsection{Proposal} -\input{tech-gaps/03-gap.tex} - -\section{Components II+III: Details} -\subsection{Component II: How engineering relates to energy justice} -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{How energy modeling can incorporate energy justice} - \input{uncertainty/07-triarchic-uncertainty.tex} -\end{frame} -\subsection{Component III: Regional Case Study} -\begin{frame}[allowframebreaks] - \frametitle{Regional Case Study} - - \begin{block}{Research Question} - How could deliberative processes incorporate a systems model to enhance - understanding of community priorities to make derived energy policies - more representative? - \end{block} - - \begin{block}{Methods} - \begin{itemize} - \item \boldorange{Semi-structured interviews}: - \begin{itemize} - \item Understand existing procedures for creating energy visions - and policies in the Champaign-Urbana region. - \item Understand how energy planners could/would understand - tradeoffs presented with a systems model. - \end{itemize} - \item \boldorange{Potentially analyzed with:} % I will decide this based on what the data looks like - \begin{itemize} - \item Discursive Analysis % "the extent to which I understand these methods..." - \item Thematic Analysis - \item Process Tracing - \item or another method... - \end{itemize} - \end{itemize} - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Results} - Rather than producing quantitative data to incorporate into the - modeling, the results will inform a process that enhances the - recognition and procedural justice aspects for developing energy visions - and policies. - - \begin{itemize} - \item Elucidate what is actually important to community members --- - not simply modeling assumptions. - \item Update model objectives based on feedback. - \end{itemize} - \end{block} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Summary} - \begin{enumerate} - \item Energy models inform policy but can't capture the ``human dimension'' - \item Discussed different aspects of justice and how ESOMs consider them - \item Introduced \texttt{Osier} as a solution to the problem of single-objective optimization - \item Explained three types of uncertainties and how they relate ESOMs and energy justice. - \item Proposed enhancements to \texttt{Osier} and a paradigmatic case-study for validation. - \end{enumerate} - -\end{frame} - - -\section*{Backup Slides} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{} - - \begin{center} - \Huge Backup Slides - \end{center} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Near-optimal Space for Cost and Carbon Emissions} - - \begin{figure} - \centering - % \resizebox{0.75\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/results/temoa_osier_benchmark_01.pgf}} - \resizebox{0.75\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/osier_mga_subset_01.pgf}} - \caption{Sampling the near-optimal space for \texttt{Osier}'s Pareto - front.} - \label{fig:osier-temoa-benchmark-1} - \end{figure} - -\end{frame} - - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Optimizing four objectives: Alternative Visualization} - - \begin{figure} - \centering - % \resizebox{0.75\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/results/temoa_osier_benchmark_01.pgf}} - \resizebox{0.9\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/4_obj_design_space_total_cost.pgf}} - \caption{The five lowest cost solutions. Darker shade corresponds to lower cost.} - \label{fig:4-obj-design-space-total-cost} - \end{figure} - -\end{frame} - -\input{uncertainty/05-structural-norm01.tex} - - -% \begin{itemize} \item Provides an illusion of objectivity that can be used to -% dismiss non-technical concerns. \item Even ``transparent'' models are -% opaque to public scrutiny. \end{itemize} - - -% \begin{frame} \frametitle{Enhanced Participation?} - -% \begin{enumerate} \item Although public hearings exist during licensing -% procedures for many types of energy projects these hearings -% \textit{close down} rather than \textit{open up} debate -% \cite{wilsdon_see-through_2004,stirling_opening_2008}. \item This is -% because public testimony can be dismissed as ``untechnical,'' such as -% testimonies raising concerns about the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) -% running through Illinois \cite{johnson_dakota_2021}. \item Opposition -% does not always stop but it can delay progress towards adopting clean -% energy technologies, and the lack of participatory options does not -% improve public trust in a technology, regardless. \item Does the -% public even know what their preferences are? \item The issue -% transforms into the following: how can we bridge the communication gap -% between the lay public and engineers in a way that maintains technical -% rigor but also directly incorporates public preferences? - -% \end{enumerate} - -% \end{frame} - -% \begin{frame} \frametitle{Energy Systems as a Social Experiment} - -% \begin{enumerate} \item Multi-objective methods are useful for -% articulating preferences and identifying tradeoffs in an iterative -% process. \item This iterative process is useful for highlighting the -% priorities of the public. Especially in the sense of energy systems as -% ``social experiments'' \cite{van_de_poel_nuclear_2011} the -% consequences of which may not always be known in advance. But they -% must always be considered in the context of alternatives, because -% maintaining the status quo is also a social experiment which in our -% present circumstances produces deleterious consequences for the -% environment and human thriving. \end{enumerate} - -% \end{frame} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/proposal/case-study.tex b/pres/proposal/case-study.tex deleted file mode 100644 index 3df7087..0000000 --- a/pres/proposal/case-study.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,14 +0,0 @@ -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Proposal \#3: Finding a vision through interlocution} - - Overcoming Arrow's theorem through an iterative articulation of values and - priorities involving the public as key deliberators. - - \begin{enumerate} - \item Expand Osier to allow modelers to address normative uncertainty. - \item Develop a deliberation procedure that incorporates osier. - \item Case study in the Champaign-Urbana region to consider the - normative uncertainties produced by having an unranked set of options. - \end{enumerate} - -\end{frame} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/proposal/norm-premise.tex b/pres/proposal/norm-premise.tex deleted file mode 100644 index a2506ee..0000000 --- a/pres/proposal/norm-premise.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,12 +0,0 @@ -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Proposal \#1: Understanding Uncertainty} - - \begin{enumerate} - \item Develop a theoretical framework to conceptualize different - uncertainties and their interrelationships. - \item Connect this framework to \textit{justice}, specifically - Schlosberg's three-tenet paradigm - \cite{schlosberg_reconceiving_2004}. - \end{enumerate} - -\end{frame} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/proposal/osier.tex b/pres/proposal/osier.tex deleted file mode 100644 index e48bdcd..0000000 --- a/pres/proposal/osier.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,233 +0,0 @@ -% \begin{frame} -% \frametitle{Proposal \#2: Building a flexible ESOM} - -% \begin{enumerate} -% \item Create an open-source multi-objective energy system model (\texttt{osier}) that can allow modelers to address -% \begin{itemize} -% \item parametric, -% \item structural, -% \item and normative uncertainties. -% \end{itemize} -% \item Develop an MGA algorithm for use with genetic algorithms in higher dimensional spaces. -% \end{enumerate} - -% \end{frame} -\section{Component 1: Preliminary Results with \texttt{Osier}} -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Open source multi-objective energy system framework (\texttt{Osier})} - \begin{itemize} - \item Hybrid methods: linear programming \& evolutionary algorithms - \item Novel algorithm for high dimensional MGA - \end{itemize} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{../docs/figures/osier_flow.png} - \caption{Flow of data through \texttt{Osier}.} - \label{fig:osier-flow} - \end{figure} - -\end{frame} - -\subsection{Methodology} -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Multi-objective Solutions} - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{4cm} - \begin{block}{} - Another way to generate alternatives... - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Pareto Front} - Creates a \boldorange{set of solutions} rather than a single optimum. - \end{block} - \column[t]{6cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/truss2d_pareto.pgf}} - \caption{Pareto front example.} - \label{fig:pareto-front} - \end{figure} - - \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Evolutionary Algorithms} - - \begin{block}{Evolutionary Algorithms for Energy System Optimization} - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{6cm} - \begin{itemize} - \item Inspired by natural selection - \item Parallelizable - \item Superior to pure linear programming methods for - \begin{itemize} - \item independence from problem convexity - \item good sampling/spacing of points along solution set. - \end{itemize} - \end{itemize} - - Right: Evolutionary algorithm flow \cite{deb_evolutionary_2014}. - \column[t]{4cm} - \centering - \begin{figure} - \includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{images/ea-flow.png} - \end{figure} - \end{columns} - \end{block} -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{How \texttt{Osier} handles structural uncertainty} - - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{0.75\columnwidth}{!}{\input{images/near-optimal-pareto-pres.pgf}} - \caption{Near optimal space for a multi-objective problem.} - \label{fig:near-opt} - \end{figure} - % \end{columns} -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame}<0> - \frametitle{How \texttt{Osier} handles structural uncertainty} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{0.75\columnwidth}{!}{\input{images/near-optimal-pareto-mga-pres.pgf}} - \caption{Near optimal space for mono- and multi-objective problems. The light blue area shows - a vertically truncated near-optimal space around the f1 objective.} - \label{fig:near-opt-mga} - \end{figure} - % \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame}<0> - \frametitle{How \texttt{Osier} handles structural uncertainty} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{0.75\columnwidth}{!}{\input{images/nd-mga-paretofront-pres.pgf}} - \caption{Alternative solutions identified in the near optimal space.} - \label{fig:nd-alt-points} - \end{figure} - % \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - - -\subsection{Preliminary Results} -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Validating \texttt{Osier}} - - \begin{figure} - \centering - % \resizebox{0.75\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/results/temoa_osier_benchmark_01.pgf}} - \resizebox{0.75\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/temoa_osier_benchmark_01.pgf}} - \caption{Comparing the results from \texttt{Osier} with another ESOM, \texttt{Temoa}.} - \label{fig:osier-temoa-benchmark-2} - \end{figure} - -\end{frame} - - - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Optimizing four objectives} - - \begin{figure} - \centering - % \resizebox{0.75\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/results/temoa_osier_benchmark_01.pgf}} - \resizebox{0.9\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/4_obj_objective_space_MGA.pgf}} - \caption{Pareto front and near-optimal solutions for the same problem with 4 objectives.} - \label{fig:4-obj-objective-space} - \end{figure} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Optimizing four objectives} - - \begin{figure} - \centering - % \resizebox{0.75\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/results/temoa_osier_benchmark_01.pgf}} - \resizebox{0.9\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/4_obj_design_space_MGA.pgf}} - \caption{Design space for the 4-objective problem with near-optimal solutions.} - \label{fig:4-obj-design-space} - \end{figure} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{How \texttt{Osier} improves on ESOMs --- and its limits} - - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{0.8\columnwidth}{!}{ - \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] - \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] - \tikzstyle{vertex} = [circle, draw=black] - \tikzstyle{hidden} = [draw=none] - \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, very thick] - - \node[vertex, fill=illiniblue](v1) at (0,5) {\textbf{Normative}}; - \node[vertex, fill=blue2](v2) at (4,0) {\textbf{Structural}}; - \node[vertex, fill=blue6](v3) at (-4,0) {\textbf{Parametric}}; - - \draw[edge] (v1) -- (v2); - \draw[edge] (v2) -- (v3); - \draw[edge] (v1) -- (v3); - - % hidden nodes for v1 - \node[hidden](h1) at (-0.75, 5) {}; - \node[hidden](h2) at (0.75, 5) {}; - - % hidden nodes for v2 - \node[hidden](h3) at (4, 0.75) {}; - \node[hidden](h4) at (4, -0.7) {}; - - % hidden nodes for v3 - \node[hidden](h5) at (-4, -0.7) {}; - \node[hidden](h6) at (-4, 0.75) {}; - - \draw[draw=none] (h4) -- (h5) node[anchor=mid, midway, sloped]{\textbf{Descriptive}}; - \draw[draw=none] (h6) -- (h1) node[anchor=mid, midway, sloped]{\textbf{Pre-descriptive}}; - \draw[draw=none] (h2) -- (h3) node[anchor=mid, midway, sloped]{\textbf{Prescriptive}}; - - % objectivity scale - \node[hidden](u1) at (-6,5) {\textbf{Epistemic}}; - \node[hidden](u2) at (-6,0) {\textbf{Aleatory}}; - \draw[edge] (u1) -- (u2); - - - % objectivity scale - \node[hidden](u1) at (6,5) {\textbf{Subjective}}; - \node[hidden](u2) at (6,0) {\textbf{Objective}}; \draw[edge] - (u1) -- (u2); - - - \end{tikzpicture} - } - \caption{A summary of three uncertainties and their interactions.} - \label{fig:triarchic-uncertainty} - \end{figure} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Future Work for \texttt{Osier}} - - \begin{block}{Improvement 1} - Improve the MGA procedure to identify \textit{maximally different} solutions in the design space. - I.e., more efficient search. - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Avenue 2} - This improvement could be unlocked with a greedy, farthest-first-traversal algorithm. - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Improvement 2} - Take advantage of evolutionary algorithms' parralelizability. - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Avenue 2} - Consider a method besides linear programming for energy dispatch (e.g., hierarchical dispatch) \cite{prina_multi-objective_2020}. - \end{block} - -\end{frame} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/tech-gaps/01-gap.tex b/pres/tech-gaps/01-gap.tex deleted file mode 100644 index 9045d89..0000000 --- a/pres/tech-gaps/01-gap.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,14 +0,0 @@ -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Gap \#1: Incomplete understanding of uncertainty} - % normative uncertainty is not a subset of structural uncertainty because there can be purely pragmatic structural - % uncertainties. For example, neglecting electrical resistance. - - Climate change is a ``wicked problem'' with many uncertainties \cite{grundmann_ozone_2018}. - - Policies derived from theory or modeling practices ignorant of these uncertainties is partially - responsible for the paradox identified previously. - - A more comprehensive understanding of these uncertainties will inform better modeling practices and - more just solutions. - -\end{frame} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/tech-gaps/02-gap.tex b/pres/tech-gaps/02-gap.tex deleted file mode 100644 index 771254a..0000000 --- a/pres/tech-gaps/02-gap.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,48 +0,0 @@ -% \begin{frame} -% \frametitle{Gap \#2: Challenges with current ESOM practices} - -% \begin{enumerate} -% \item Structural Uncertainty -% \begin{itemize} -% \item $\sim$100\% of ESOM frameworks optimize cost. -% \item Stanard MGA procedures anchor alternatives to cost --- no true -% tradeoff analysis. -% \end{itemize} -% \item Normative Uncertainty: Most ESOM analyses are prescriptive, few if -% any articulate a normative premise to justify their conclusions. -% \begin{itemize} -% \item ``Pathway to 100\% Renewable Energy...'' --- a commonly -% unjustified normative conclusion, right in the title! -% \item Why should non-renewable sources be excluded? Renewable energy -% is not guaranteed to be democratic \cite{winner_artifacts_1980}, nor -% sustainable \cite{bell_toward_2020}. -% \end{itemize} -% \end{enumerate} - -% \end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Gap 1: Challenges with current ESOM practices} - \begin{block}{Technical Gaps} - \begin{enumerate} - \item Exclusive optimization over system cost misrecognizes the plurality of - preferences and priorities. Tradeoff analysis is impossible. - \item Even with open source code and transparent data sources, energy system - models remain opaque --- decision making black boxes. - \end{enumerate} - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Proposed Work Component I: Multi-objective optimization} - \begin{itemize} - \item Partially address procedural/recognition justice by facilitating tradeoff analysis - through multi-objective optimization with evolutionary - algorithms. - \item Develop an MGA algorithm for high dimensional space. - \end{itemize} - - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Stretch Goal --- Addressing Technical Gap 2} - Further enhance the transparency component of procedural justice by developing this - tool in a way that provides the \textit{capability} for anyone interested to - verify model results. I.e., make accessibility a design priority. - \end{block} -\end{frame} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/tech-gaps/03-gap.tex b/pres/tech-gaps/03-gap.tex deleted file mode 100644 index aeb059e..0000000 --- a/pres/tech-gaps/03-gap.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,31 +0,0 @@ -% \begin{frame} -% \frametitle{Gap \#3: Overcoming Arrow's Theorem} - -% \begin{enumerate} -% \item Deciding among alternative solutions is challenging without a normative premise. -% \item Without direct consultation of stakeholders, it's impossible know how they would understand tradeoffs. -% \item Capturing the ``human dimension'' requires incorporating formal methods from social science: case studies, -% interviews, focus groups, surveys, etc. The ESOM literature struggles to do this. -% \end{enumerate} - -% \end{frame} -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Gap 2: Normative Uncertainty \& Deliberative Processes} - \begin{block}{Technical Gap} - \begin{enumerate} - \item Deciding among alternative solutions is challenging without a normative premise. - \item Without direct consultation of stakeholders, it's impossible know how they would understand tradeoffs. - \item Capturing the ``human dimension'' requires incorporating formal methods from social science: case studies, - interviews, focus groups, surveys, etc. The ESOM literature struggles to do this \cite{pfenninger_energy_2014}. - \end{enumerate} - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Proposed Work Component II: Integrative theory of uncertainties} - Further develop the unifying theory of model development through the lens of - addressing triple uncertainties. - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Proposed Work Component III: Case study of Champaign-Urbana} - Case study of energy planning processes in the Champaign-Urbana region to validate - the usefulness of \texttt{Osier} and test the salience of various uncertainties. - \end{block} - -\end{frame} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/uncertainty/00-uncertainty.tex b/pres/uncertainty/00-uncertainty.tex deleted file mode 100644 index 0d30d28..0000000 --- a/pres/uncertainty/00-uncertainty.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,25 +0,0 @@ -% \subsection{Triarchic Uncertainty} -% \input{uncertainty/07-triarchic-uncertainty.tex} -% let's begin with a familiar form of uncertainty -- parametric -% \subsection{Parametric Uncertainty} -% \input{uncertainty/01-parametric01.tex} -% \input{uncertainty/01-parametric02.tex} -% \subsection{Structural Uncertainty} -% \input{uncertainty/02-structural01.tex} -% \subsection{Normative Uncertainty} -% \input{uncertainty/03-normative01.tex} - -% \section{Technical Gap \#2} -% \input{tech-gaps/02-gap.tex} - -% \section{Proposal \#2} -% \input{proposal/osier.tex} - -% \section{Theory of Model Development} -% \subsection{Pre-Descriptive: Normative-Parametric} -% \input{uncertainty/06-para-normative01.tex} -% \subsection{Descriptive: Parametric-Structural} -% \input{uncertainty/04-para-structural01.tex} -% \subsection{Prescriptive: Structural-Normative} -% \input{uncertainty/05-structural-norm01.tex} - diff --git a/pres/uncertainty/01-parametric01.tex b/pres/uncertainty/01-parametric01.tex deleted file mode 100644 index ac115a3..0000000 --- a/pres/uncertainty/01-parametric01.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,113 +0,0 @@ -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Parametric Uncertainty} - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{4cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{ - \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] - \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] \tikzstyle{vertex} = - [circle, draw=black, fill=illiniblue] \tikzstyle{hidden} = - [draw=none] \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, very thick] - - \node[vertex](v3) at (-4,0) {\textbf{Parametric}}; - - \end{tikzpicture} - } - % \caption{Parametric Uncertainty} \label{fig:triarchic-uncertainty} - \end{figure} - - \column[t]{6cm} - \begin{block}{Parametric Uncertainty} - Related to uncertainty in model inputs (empirical values). The most - commonly addressed type of uncertainty in science and engineering - \cite{yue_review_2018,decarolis_using_2011,morgan_uncertainty_1990}. - \end{block} - - % May be classified as either \boldorange{aleatory} or - % \boldorange{epistemic} - % \cite{pfenninger_energy_2014,kiureghian_aleatory_2009}. - \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Examples of Parametric Uncertainty} - - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{5cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{ - \input{../docs/figures/multiple-distributions.pgf} - } - \caption{Possible distributions of several parameters.} - \label{fig:multi-distributions} - \end{figure} - - \column[t]{5cm} - - \begin{itemize} - \item \textcolor{black}{Rates (e.g., interest, learning, growth),} - \item \textcolor{black}{costs (e.g., fuel, capital, O\&M),} - \item \textcolor{black}{aggregated energy demand,} - \item \textcolor{black}{spent fuel burnup - \cite{feng_sensitivity_2020},} - \item \textcolor{black}{nuclear cross-section data - \cite{eades_influence_2016,radaideh_combining_2019},} - \item \textcolor{black}{likelihood and magnitude of consequences - (i.e., probabilistic risk assessment).} - \end{itemize} - - % Note: \textbf{\textcolor{illiniblue}{aleatory}} and - % \textbf{\textcolor{illiniorange}{epistemic}} - \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - -% \begin{frame} -% \frametitle{Consequences of not addressing parametric uncertainty} - -% A majority of ESOM articles use \textit{scenario analysis} to weakly ddress -% parametric uncertainty \cite{yue_review_2018}. \\~\\ - -% Leading to: -% \begin{enumerate} -% \item Overconfidence in results -% \item Cognitive myopia -% \item Implicit normative biases -% \end{enumerate} - - -% \end{frame} - -% \begin{frame} -% \frametitle{Addressing parametric uncertainty} - -% \begin{columns} -% \column[t]{5cm} -% \begin{figure} -% \centering -% \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{ -% \input{../pres/images/confidence-int.pgf} -% } -% \caption{Systematically addressing parametric uncertainty produces confidence intervals.} -% \label{fig:confidence-intervals} -% \end{figure} - -% \column[t]{5cm} -% \boldblue{Idea}: Rerun a simulation until you reach a large enough -% sample size to do statistics.\\~\\ -% Formal methods to address parametric uncertainty$^*$: -% \begin{itemize} -% \item ``Monte Carlo'' (i.e., statistical sampling) -% \item Sensitivity analysis (specific or global) -% \item Stochastic optimization -% \end{itemize} - - -% % \small{$^*$These methods are appropriate for \boldorange{aleatory} -% % uncertainties.} -% \end{columns} - -% \end{frame} diff --git a/pres/uncertainty/02-structural01.tex b/pres/uncertainty/02-structural01.tex deleted file mode 100644 index 5a98645..0000000 --- a/pres/uncertainty/02-structural01.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,123 +0,0 @@ -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Structural Uncertainty} - - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{4cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{ - \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] - \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] - \tikzstyle{vertex} = [circle, draw=black, fill=illiniblue] - \tikzstyle{hidden} = [draw=none] - \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, very thick] - - % \node[vertex](v1) at (0,5) {\textbf{Normative}}; - \node[vertex](v2) at (4,0) {\textbf{Structural}}; - - - \end{tikzpicture} - } - % \caption{Parametric Uncertainty} - % \label{fig:triarchic-uncertainty} - \end{figure} - - \column[t]{6cm} - \begin{block}{Structural Uncertainty} - [R]efers to the imperfect and incomplete nature of the equations describing the system \cite{decarolis_using_2011}. - \end{block} - - This type of uncertainty will \textit{always} persist. - \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Example Sources of Structural Uncertainty} - - Unmodeled or unmodelable aspects of the model related to: - - \begin{enumerate} - \item Objective functions - \item Physics fidelity, for example - \begin{itemize} - \item optimal power flow, - \item turbulence (air flow, water flow, etc.), - \item thermodynamics (e.g., weather impacting a power plant's ultimate heat sink) - \end{itemize} - \end{enumerate} - -\end{frame} - -% \begin{frame} -% \frametitle{Consequences of unhandled structural uncertainty} - -% \begin{enumerate} -% \item Overconfidence in results -% \item Cognitive myopia -% \item Missed acceptable alternatives -% \end{enumerate} - -% \end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Addressing Structural Uncertainty} - \begin{block}{} - \begin{center} - Generate \textit{insight} rather than \textit{answers}. - \end{center} - \end{block} - \begin{block}{Idea} - Look for alternatives in the ``near-optimal'' space. - \end{block} - - \begin{block}{Modeling-to-generate-alternatives (MGA)} - \begin{enumerate} - \item \boldorange{Relax} the objective function. - \item \boldorange{Search} for maximally different solutions in the design space. - \item \boldorange{Iterate} until enough solutions have been generated. - \end{enumerate} - \end{block} -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Structural Uncertainty in an ESOM} - - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{10cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - % \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/standard-mga.pgf}} - \resizebox{0.75\columnwidth}{!}{\input{images/naive_mga_lp.pgf}} - \caption{Illustration of the MGA algorithm.} - \label{fig:standard-mga} - \end{figure} - \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - -% \begin{frame} -% \frametitle{Addressing Structural Uncertainty} - -% \begin{columns} -% \column[t]{4cm} -% \boldblue{Idea:} Look for alternatives in the ``near-optimal'' space.\\~\\ - -% How? Modeling-to-generate-alternatives (MGA) -% \begin{enumerate} -% \item \boldorange{Relax} the objective function. -% \item \boldorange{Search} for maximally different solutions in the design space. -% \item \boldorange{Iterate} until enough solutions have been generated. -% \end{enumerate} - -% \column[t]{6cm} -% \begin{figure} -% \centering -% % \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{../docs/figures/standard-mga.pgf}} -% \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\input{images/naive_mga_lp.pgf}} -% \caption{Illustration of the MGA algorithm.} -% \label{fig:standard-mga} -% \end{figure} -% \end{columns} - -% \end{frame} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/uncertainty/03-normative01.tex b/pres/uncertainty/03-normative01.tex deleted file mode 100644 index 2f2d3c1..0000000 --- a/pres/uncertainty/03-normative01.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,56 +0,0 @@ -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Normative Uncertainty} - - % Stating your assumptions is a necessary but insufficient condition for addressing normative uncertainty. - - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{4cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{ - \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] - \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] - \tikzstyle{vertex} = [circle, draw=black, fill=illiniblue] - \tikzstyle{hidden} = [draw=none] - \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, very thick] - - \node[vertex](v1) at (0,5) {\textbf{Normative}}; - - - \end{tikzpicture} - } - % \caption{Parametric Uncertainty} - % \label{fig:triarchic-uncertainty} - \end{figure} - - \column[t]{6cm} - \begin{block}{Normative Uncertainty} - Arises from the plurality of morally defensible, but incompatible, choices; - and a plurality of moral theories justifying those choices - \cite{taebi_governing_2020,van_uffelen_revisiting_2024}. - \end{block} - - \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - -% \begin{frame} -% \frametitle{Consequences of unacknowledged normative uncertainties} - -% \begin{enumerate} -% \item Implicit normative premises cannot be debated, -% \item Precludes alternative formulations of \textit{justice}, -% \item Raises doubts about legitimacy of conclusions. -% \end{enumerate} - -% \end{frame} - - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Addressing Normative Uncertainty} - % Related to the \boldorange{human dimension} of modeling systems \cite{pfenninger_energy_2014}. \\~\\ \pause - - % Why is this hard to include?\\~\\ \pause - There are no formal methods to address normative uncertainty... \textit{in engineering.} - -\end{frame} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/uncertainty/04-para-structural01.tex b/pres/uncertainty/04-para-structural01.tex deleted file mode 100644 index 45b1e28..0000000 --- a/pres/uncertainty/04-para-structural01.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,45 +0,0 @@ -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Descriptive: Parametric-Structural} - - This is where the ``research question'' lives. - - \begin{itemize} - \item What is being modeled (i.e. what are the in/dependent variables)? - \item How are time series represented? (e.g., weather / demand data)? % normative if motivated by an unstated normative premise. - \item Which technologies are included in the simulation? % normative, especially if certain technologies are excluded without explanation. - \item What is the spatiotemporal scale/resolution of the model? % likely normative if not considering intergenerational justice. - \end{itemize} - - - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{0.60\columnwidth}{!}{ - \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] - \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] - \tikzstyle{vertex} = [circle, draw=black, fill=illiniblue] - \tikzstyle{hidden} = [draw=none] - \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, very thick] - - % \node[vertex](v1) at (0,5) {\textbf{Normative}}; - \node[vertex](v2) at (4,0) {\textbf{Structural}}; - \node[vertex](v3) at (-4,0) {\textbf{Parametric}}; - - % \draw[edge] (v1) -- (v2); - \draw[edge] (v2) -- (v3); - - \node[hidden](h4) at (4, -0.7) {}; - - % % hidden nodes for v3 - \node[hidden](h5) at (-4, -0.7) {}; - % \node[hidden](h6) at (-4, 0.75) {}; - - \draw[draw=none] (h4) -- (h5) node[anchor=mid, midway, sloped]{\textbf{Descriptive}}; - - - \end{tikzpicture} - } - % \caption{Parametric Uncertainty} - % \label{fig:triarchic-uncertainty} - \end{figure} - -\end{frame} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/uncertainty/05-structural-norm01.tex b/pres/uncertainty/05-structural-norm01.tex deleted file mode 100644 index 7c9d0ae..0000000 --- a/pres/uncertainty/05-structural-norm01.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,115 +0,0 @@ -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Choosing among alternatives} - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{6cm} - - \textit{Generating prescriptive conclusions is the primary reason to - model energy systems \cite{decarolis_using_2011}.}\\~\\ - - % If the solution to structural uncertainty was identifying alternative, - % ``sub-optimal'' solutions, then the prescriptive stage means deciding - % among these diverse alternatives.\\~\\ - - \begin{block}{Arrow's Impossibility Theorem} - It is impossible to construct a utility function that maps - individual preferences onto a global preference order without - imposition or dictating \cite{kasprzyk_many_2013, - franssen_arrows_2005,arrow_difficulty_1950}. - \end{block} - - \column[t]{4cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{ - \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] - \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] \tikzstyle{vertex} = - [circle, draw=black, fill=illiniblue] \tikzstyle{hidden} = - [draw=none] \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, very thick] - - \node[vertex](v1) at (0,5) {\textbf{Normative}}; - \node[vertex](v2) at (4,0) {\textbf{Structural}}; - - \draw[edge] (v1) -- (v2); - - \node[hidden](h2) at (0.75, 5) {}; - - % % hidden nodes for v2 - \node[hidden](h3) at (4, 0.75) {}; - - \draw[draw=none] (h2) -- (h3) node[anchor=mid, midway, - sloped]{\textbf{Prescriptive}}; - - \end{tikzpicture} - } - % \caption{Parametric Uncertainty} \label{fig:triarchic-uncertainty} - \end{figure} - - \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Consequences of Arrow's Theorem} - - \begin{enumerate} - \item There is no one-size-fits-all method for public engagement or - decision-making. - \item The methods of engagement must ``open up'' debate rather than - ``close it down'' \cite{wilsdon_see-through_2004,dryzek_deliberative_2013}. - \item Ideals of justice and ``just outcomes'' can never be adequately - captured by an aggregated ``metric'' --- this would imply a utility - function that could map individual preferences to a collective - preference. - \end{enumerate} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame}<0> - \frametitle{Potential Pitfalls} - - \begin{enumerate} - \item Reproducing errors of ``public understanding of science'' and the - ``deficit model'' \cite{wynne_misunderstood_1992,wynne_public_2006}. - \end{enumerate} - -\end{frame} - -% \begin{frame} \frametitle{Purpose of Multiobjective Methods} - -% \textit{The second purpose of multiobjective methods is to help -% participants in the planning process define and articulate their values, -% apply them rationally and consistently, and document the resuits. The -% object is to inspire confidence in the soundness of the decision without -% being unnecessarily difficult. Multiobjective methods used in this manner -% can also help negotiation, by quantifying and communicating the priorities -% held by different interests \cite{hobbs_optimization_1995}.} \\~\\ - -% Although the usefulness of these methods were recognized long ago, the -% application of these methods was stunted by computational tools and data -% visualization capabilities.\\~\\ - -% Prior articulation methods vs interactive methods. - % Expanding on this -% idea, multiobjective optimization ``help people to understand the -% problem better, explore their feelings, form a coherent, defensible set -% of values, and understand the implications of those values for the -% decision'' \cite{hobbs_optimization_1995}. - -% \end{frame} - -% \begin{frame} \frametitle{Connecting to Energy Justice} - -% The three-legged description of energy justice, recognition, procedure, -% and distribution, describes the necessary ingredients for a ``just'' -% outcome. However, there are many articulations for each of these three -% types of justice. This type of plurality makes it challenging to define a -% universally ``just'' outcome. - -% The way forward is through deliberation. This is why Arrow's theorem runs -% between normative and structural uncertainties. Choosing a set of -% objectives to model is ultimately a normative choice. Even if this choice -% were clear, the result remains normatively uncertain because modelers and -% stakeholders must then choose among alternatives identified by the model. -% Thus, these two are in dialogue with each other. - -% \end{frame} \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/pres/uncertainty/06-para-normative01.tex b/pres/uncertainty/06-para-normative01.tex deleted file mode 100644 index 4f3309a..0000000 --- a/pres/uncertainty/06-para-normative01.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,91 +0,0 @@ -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{How normativity influences parametric uncertainty} - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{4cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{ - \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] - \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] \tikzstyle{vertex} = - [circle, draw=black, fill=illiniblue] \tikzstyle{hidden} = - [draw=none] \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, very thick] - - \node[vertex](v1) at (0,5) {\textbf{Normative}}; - % \node[vertex](v2) at (4,0) {\textbf{Structural}}; - \node[vertex](v3) at (-4,0) {\textbf{Parametric}}; - - \draw[edge] (v1) -- (v3); - - \node[hidden](h1) at (-0.75, 5) {}; - - \node[hidden](h6) at (-4, 0.75) {}; - - \draw[draw=none] (h6) -- (h1) node[anchor=mid, midway, - sloped]{\textbf{Pre-descriptive}}; - - \end{tikzpicture} - } - % \caption{Parametric Uncertainty} \label{fig:triarchic-uncertainty} - \end{figure} - - \column[t]{6cm} - Related to model inputs, modelers may: - \begin{itemize} - \item \boldorange{Curate} input data from other sources, - \item \boldorange{Generate} data from prior model runs, - \item \boldorange{Produce} an input distribution from experience. - \end{itemize} - \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{How are representative probability distributions chosen?} - - \begin{columns} - \column[t]{5cm} - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{ - \input{../docs/figures/many-dist-single-param.pgf} - } - \caption{Possible distributions for a single parameter. Which is best?} - \label{fig:many-distributions} - \end{figure} - \column[t]{5cm} - \textit{The probability distributions are usually obtained through modelers' - judgement or expert elicitations \cite{yue_review_2018}.}\\~\\ - - \boldblue{Problem:} Without understanding how or why a modeler created or - chose a distribution, the twin goals of reproducibility and transparency are - challenged. - \end{columns} - -\end{frame} - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{What influences the choice of probability distribution?} - \begin{block}{Knightian/Deep/Epistemic Uncertainty} - Unknowable unknowns --- uncertainties that cannot be quantified or measured due to a - lack of knowledge or understanding \cite{knight_risk_1921}. - \end{block} - \pause - \begin{block}{Ambiguity Aversion / Ellsberg Paradox} - A decision maker will choose a highly risky option with quantifiable uncertainties - over an option with deep uncertainties \cite{ellsberg_risk_1961}. - \end{block} -\end{frame} - - -\begin{frame} - \frametitle{Considerations with Ambiguity Aversion} - - For those highly \boldorange{epistemic} uncertainties... - - \begin{enumerate} - \item Awareness of the Ellsberg Paradox does not alleviate ambiguity aversion \cite{jia_learning_2020}. - \item Ambiguity aversion produces a cautionary shift (i.e. more conservative estimation) \cite{keller_examination_2007}. - \end{enumerate} - -\end{frame} diff --git a/pres/uncertainty/07-triarchic-uncertainty.tex b/pres/uncertainty/07-triarchic-uncertainty.tex deleted file mode 100644 index f9fa3da..0000000 --- a/pres/uncertainty/07-triarchic-uncertainty.tex +++ /dev/null @@ -1,52 +0,0 @@ - \begin{figure} - \centering - \resizebox{0.8\columnwidth}{!}{ - \begin{tikzpicture}[nodes={text depth=0.25ex,text height=1.25ex distance=1.7cm}] - \tikzstyle{every node}=[font=\small] - \tikzstyle{vertex} = [circle, draw=black, fill=illiniblue] - \tikzstyle{vertex1} = [circle, draw=black, fill=blue4] - \tikzstyle{vertex2} = [circle, draw=black, fill=blue6] - \tikzstyle{vertex3} = [circle, draw=black, fill=blue2] - \tikzstyle{hidden} = [draw=none] - \tikzstyle{edge} = [<->, very thick] - - \node[vertex](v1) at (0,5) {\textbf{Normative}}; - \node[vertex](v2) at (4,0) {\textbf{Structural}}; - \node[vertex](v3) at (-4,0) {\textbf{Parametric}}; - - \draw[edge] (v1) -- (v2); - \draw[edge] (v2) -- (v3); - \draw[edge] (v1) -- (v3); - - % hidden nodes for v1 - \node[hidden](h1) at (-0.75, 5) {}; - \node[hidden](h2) at (0.75, 5) {}; - - % hidden nodes for v2 - \node[hidden](h3) at (4, 0.75) {}; - \node[hidden](h4) at (4, -0.7) {}; - - % hidden nodes for v3 - \node[hidden](h5) at (-4, -0.7) {}; - \node[hidden](h6) at (-4, 0.75) {}; - - \draw[draw=none] (h4) -- (h5) node[anchor=mid, midway, sloped]{\textbf{Descriptive}}; - \draw[draw=none] (h6) -- (h1) node[anchor=mid, midway, sloped]{\textbf{Pre-descriptive}}; - \draw[draw=none] (h2) -- (h3) node[anchor=mid, midway, sloped]{\textbf{Prescriptive}}; - - % objectivity scale - \node[hidden](u1) at (-6,5) {\textbf{Epistemic}}; - \node[hidden](u2) at (-6,0) {\textbf{Aleatory}}; - \draw[edge] (u1) -- (u2); - - - % objectivity scale - \node[hidden](u1) at (6,5) {\textbf{Subjective}}; - \node[hidden](u2) at (6,0) {\textbf{Objective}}; \draw[edge] - (u1) -- (u2); - - - \end{tikzpicture} - } - \caption{A summary of three uncertainties and their interactions.} - \end{figure} \ No newline at end of file