Search

Based on the data collected from smart meters, electricity pricing models can be developed to balance power supply and demand in each time slot and obtain the optimal consumption loads and prices. However, in real life, users’ reserved consumption requirement loads sometimes deviate significantly from the optimal consumption loads obtained from models, which results in overloaded power systems or even power cuts. To address this issue, an Engineering Process Control monitoring strategy has been proposed in this paper to minimize the difference between the optimal and the users’ reserved consumption requirement loads. We proposed an exponential weighted moving average model to predict the load difference in future time slots, and also developed a novel quadratic function based demand response mechanism to adjust the power price for power providers. The demand response mechanism can be used to adjust the price in the future time slots when the predicted demand exceeds the upper or lower boundary. Simulation results indicate that the quadratic function adjustment strategy has excellent performance in a practical power market in Singapore. Compared with the linear function based adjustment method, the proposed quadratic function based adjustment method decreases the adjustment times and standard errors of residuals, and increases the social welfare and power suppliers’ profits under the same boundary conditions. In addition, the performance of the proposed strategy demonstrated its competency in peak-cutting and valley-filling and balancing energy provision with demands.

Quality of life (QOL) can be compromised in patients with bone metastases, and validated QOL instruments are required to accurately measure QOL outcomes in this population. This study investigated the validity, reliability and responsiveness of the EORTC QLQ-BM22 module with the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL instrument in bone metastases.The studied patients underwent palliative radiotherapy to bone metastases in the randomized NCIC CTG SC 23 trial. Multi-trait scaling analysis was performed to determine convergent and divergent validity among scales. Pearson coefficients were calculated to determine the correlation between items of the two instruments. The clinical validity and responsiveness of the QLQ-BM22 was tested by known group comparisons of different performance status and response to radiotherapy.204 patients completed both questionnaires at baseline and 42day follow-up. On multi-trait scaling analysis, there was mixed evidence of construct validity (explained by the questionnaire format and population characteristics). There was little correlation between most QLQ-BM22 and QLQ-C15-PAL items (except for conceptually related scales) validating their complementary nature. There were statistically significant differences in all QLQ-BM22 scale scores in groups with KPS80 vs. KPS⩾80 and three out of four QLQ-BM22 scale scores in "responders" vs. "non-responders" to radiotherapy. In patients who responded to radiotherapy, there were statistically significant differences in all QLQ-BM22 scale scores between baseline and follow-up.This study further validates the use of the QLQ-BM22 as a robust and sensitive instrument to assess QOL in patients with bone metastases treated with palliative radiotherapy.

7516Background: Patients with relapsed/refractory DLBCL have heterogeneous outcomes to subsequent therapy. The subgroup of these patients with refractory disease (r-DLBCL) have a worse prognosis. A multi-cohort study, SCHOLAR-1 (Retrospective Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Research) was performed to evaluate outcomes for patients with r-DLBCL and serve as a benchmark for future clinical trials in this population. Methods: Eligible subjects had r-DLBCL defined as progressive disease (PD) or stable disease (SD) as best response to chemotherapy (duration of SD