MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981657074 · doi:10.1109/isgt.2010.5434752

Optimal and autonomous incentive-based energy consumption scheduling algorithm for smart grid

2010· article· en· W1981657074 on OpenAlexaff
Amir-Hamed Mohsenian-Rad, Vincent W. S. Wong, Juri Jatskevich, Robert Schober

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmart gridComputer scienceSoftware deploymentEnergy consumptionScheduling (production processes)GridDemand responseScheduleDistributed computingDistributed generationDistributed algorithmIncentiveEnergy management systemElectricityEnergy managementReal-time computingEnergy (signal processing)Mathematical optimizationEngineeringRenewable energyElectrical engineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider deployment of energy consumption scheduling (ECS) devices in smart meters for autonomous demand side management within a neighborhood, where several buildings share an energy source. The ECS devices are assumed to be built inside smart meters and to be connected to not only the power grid, but also to a local area network which is essential for handling two-way communications in a smart grid infrastructure. They interact automatically by running a distributed algorithm to find the optimal energy consumption schedule for each subscriber, with an aim at reducing the total energy cost as well as the peak-to-average-ratio (PAR) in load demand in the system. Incentives are also provided for the subscribers to actually use the ECS devices via a novel pricing model, derived from a game-theoretic analysis. Simulation results confirm that our proposed distributed algorithm significantly reduces the PAR and the total cost in the system.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations509
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207