MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1644987935 · doi:10.1109/tii.2015.2475215

Optimal Investment for Retail Company in Electricity Market

2015· article· en· W1644987935 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsElectricity marketElectricityLagrange multiplierInvestment (military)EconomicsMicroeconomicsReturn on investmentMathematical optimizationProfit (economics)MathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Considering an optimal investment problem for a retailer in electricity market, the objective is to seek the optimal investment decision that maximizes the weighted sum of the expected return and the variance of wealth. Unlike existing works, the price fluctuation of both the wholesale and retail side of electricity market is considered, and the retailer can invest its wealth in electricity market and traditional financial market simultaneously. Hence, there is a complicated wealth dynamic, which is the main challenge in our work. In this paper, by utilizing the method of Lagrange multiplier and the classical Tchebycheff inequality, we first show that the investment problem is a quadratic programming problem in terms of the decision variable, and thus has a unique optimal solution. Then, a closed-form optimal solution is derived by solving the stationary equation and comparing the feasible solution interval. Based on the optimal solution, we find the key price, which will affect the investment is the wholesale price rather than the retail price. Moreover, with a similar analysis approach, we also provide the optimal solution considering a more general model, which allows the retailer to purchase the electricity temporarily to avoid the supply shortage. Extensive simulations demonstrate the better performance of the proposed solution over the Kelly strategy widely used in the financial market.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score0.854

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.168 · 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