MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015020077 · doi:10.1145/2768510.2768529

Auc2Charge

2015· article· en· W2015020077 on OpenAlexafffund
Qiao Xiang, Fanxin Kong, Xue Liu, Xi Chen, Linghe Kong, Lei Rao

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsSoftware deploymentElectricityComputer scienceGridMode (computer interface)Social WelfareDouble auctionEnvironmental economicsOperations researchSimulationMicroeconomicsCommon value auctionElectrical engineeringEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing market share of electric vehicles (EVs) makes large-scale charging stations indispensable infrastructure for integrating EVs into the future smart grid. Thus their operation modes have drawn great attention from researchers. One promising mode called park-and-charge was recently proposed. It allows people to park their EVs at a parking lot, where EVs can get charged during the parking time. This mode has been experimented and demonstrated in small scale. However, the missing of an efficient market mechanism is an important gap preventing its large-scale deployment. Existing pricing policies, e.g., pay-by-use and flat-rate pricing, would jeopardize the efficiency of electricity allocation and the corresponding social welfare in the park-and-charge mode, and thus are inapplicable. To find an efficient mechanism, this paper explores the feasibility and benefits of utilizing auction mechanism in the EV park-and-charge mode. The auction allows EV users to submit and update bids on their charging demand to the charging station, which makes corresponding electricity allocation and pricing decisions. To this end, we propose Auc2Charge, an online auction framework. Auc2Charge is truthful and individual rational. Running in polynomial time, it provides an efficient electricity allocation for EV users with a close-form approximation ratio on system social welfare. Through both theoretical analysis and numerical simulation, we demonstrate the efficacy of Auc2Charge in terms of social welfare and user satisfaction.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.692
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations18
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207