Game-Theoretic Demand-Side Management With Storage Devices for the Future Smart Grid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study the demand side management (DSM) problem when customers are equipped with energy storage devices. Two games are discussed: the first is a non-cooperative one played between the residential energy consumers, while the second is a Stackelberg game played between the utility provider and the energy consumers. We introduce a new cost function applicable to the case of users selling back stored energy. The non-cooperative energy consumption game is played between users who schedule their energy use to minimize energy cost. The game is shown to have a unique Nash equilibrium, that is also the global system optimal point. In the Stackelberg game, the utility provider sets the prices to maximize its profit knowing that users will respond by minimizing their cost. We provide existence and uniqueness results for the Stackelberg equilibrium. The Stackelberg game is shown to be the general case of the minimum Peak-to-Average power ratio (PAR) problem. Two algorithms, centralized and distributed, are presented to solve the Stackelberg game. We present results that elucidate the interplay between storage capacity, energy requirements, number of users and system performance measured in total cost and peak-to-average power ratio (PAR).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".