Breakout Group on standardised model nomenclature

breakout-group
frankfurt-2017

#1

(This post has been given ‘wiki’ status so that anyone wanting to add their sections in (from the sub-groups) can do so directly in my post, just click the green edit icon in the top right corner!)

4 sub-groups of this, with documents found here:

  1. Technology definitions in code - https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aK4yYqHWIJF1k-XG7cnN2DooUs_sveXaR6iOKjBmN54/edit

Output:

  1. Glossary completed with ~25 technologies/other terms for which we agree on the abbreviation.

Discussion points moving forward:

  1. Many technologies/other terms for which we don’t agree on whether to abbreviate or not. Should we start a searchable dictionary for these?

#2

Hey all,
(1) I updated the articles for csp/cst (although it’s two different concepts in my view), chp, ccs, h2, nuclear power and photovoltaics. I think there are more terms that could be transferred from the google sheets file to the glossary. For H2 and Nuclear Power I added the link to the google-doc as source as I used Matteos wordings.

(2) About the dictionary: I would try to set up a first version which then could be commented / ammended by everyone. But I’m not sure where a good place would be in the wiki and how to add it. I think in the end it could either be put in the “models”-article or get its own menu-bulletpoint. What is a good way of putting something out there to try out the method maybe for 20-50 most common variable/constraint-names?


#3

@Editha, am I right in saying you were in one of the sub-groups, looking at model vs. simulation? Would be good to get the contribution from that subgroup detailed in this thread! You can update my original post as it is an editable ‘wiki’ post.


#4

@brynpickering True. It may take some time to find time :wink:
But I write it on my list.


#5

Understood! Doesn’t need anything more than a few lines, especially if you can link the discussion to a google doc/other that was being completed during the discussion.