MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010420651 · doi:10.1109/epec.2014.14

An Evaluation of Electric Vehicle Penetration under Demand Response in a Multi-Agent Based Simulation

2014· article· en· W2010420651 on OpenAlexaff
Zhanle Wang, Raman Paranjape

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectric vehicleAutomotive engineeringComputer scienceDemand responseScheduling (production processes)Electric power systemPeak demandSimulationPower (physics)EngineeringElectrical engineeringElectricity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes an electric vehicle charging model and various control algorithms that are further incorporated into a multi-agent system to evaluate impacts of electric vehicle penetration on the power system. Electric vehicles have become increasingly popular due to the high costs of the operation of gas / diesel powered vehicles and the potential to reduce CO <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</sub> emission. In this work, we propose the electric vehicle charging model and associated control algorithms to aggregate the electric vehicle load. Simulation results show that uncontrolled charging of electric vehicles can jeopardize the stability of the power system. In a worst-case scenario this can lead to an increase of peak demand by 53.2%, while by using appropriate scheduled charging the electric vehicles can have no contribution to the peak demand. Furthermore, scheduled charging dramatically reduces the standard deviation of the residential load (by up to 51%). Therefore, the aggregation of electric vehicle demand under an appropriate demand response control strategy has the potential to dramatically improve the stability of the power system with virtually no negative impacts. The proposed electric vehicle charging model and the associated scheduling algorithm can be embedded into a home energy management system or a smart charger.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.276
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations60
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207