MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1510732983 · doi:10.1109/greentech.2015.29

Fairness-Aware Game Theoretic Approach for Demand Response in Microgrids

2015· article· en· W1510732983 on OpenAlexaff
Naouar Yaagoubi, Hussein T. Mouftah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemand responseShapley valueComputer scienceSmart gridContext (archaeology)GridGame theoryDistributed generationElectric power systemCooperative game theoryMathematical optimizationOperations researchPower (physics)ElectricityMicroeconomicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Demand response programs are implemented by the utilities to manage the energy consumption at consumer side. Demands are managed in response to supply conditions as opposed to the traditional grid. The existing programs focus mainly on achieving system objectives such as minimizing peaks and reducing the cost of power generation. Consequently, users' electrical bills will be reduced but the question of fairness has barely been discussed in the literature. In this paper, the issue of fairness within demand response programs is addressed. In this context, a fair pricing model based on the contribution of each user toward attaining the aggregated system cost is proposed. In addition, the proposed system considers a more realistic scenario that consists of multiple energy sources within a micro grid as opposed to existing ones that use only one shared energy source. We first employ the concept of Shapley value in the pricing model to evaluate the fairness of existing works. Then, we use an approximation of this value to drive our proposed demand response program. Finally, we evaluate the use of the approximate Shapley within our proposed demand response algorithm and compare it to existing works.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.764
Threshold uncertainty score0.504

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.204 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207