MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051431619 · doi:10.1109/tsg.2011.2173507

Optimal Scheduling for Charging and Discharging of Electric Vehicles

2012· article· en· W2051431619 on OpenAlexaff
Bala Venkatesh, Ling Guan

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Smart Grid · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScheduling (production processes)Electric vehicleAutomotive engineeringComputer scienceElectrical engineeringEngineeringPower (physics)PhysicsOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vehicle electrification will have a significant impact on the power grid due to the increase in electricity consumption. It is important to perform intelligent scheduling for charging and discharging of electric vehicles (EVs). However, there are two major challenges in the scheduling problem. First, it is challenging to find the globally optimal scheduling solution which can minimize the total cost. Second, it is difficult to find a distributed scheduling scheme which can handle a large population and the random arrivals of the EVs. In this paper, we propose a globally optimal scheduling scheme and a locally optimal scheduling scheme for EV charging and discharging. We first formulate a global scheduling optimization problem, in which the charging powers are optimized to minimize the total cost of all EVs which perform charging and discharging during the day. The globally optimal solution provides the globally minimal total cost. However, the globally optimal scheduling scheme is impractical since it requires the information on the future base loads and the arrival times and the charging periods of the EVs that will arrive in the future time of the day. To develop a practical scheduling scheme, we then formulate a local scheduling optimization problem, which aims to minimize the total cost of the EVs in the current ongoing EV set in the local group. The locally optimal scheduling scheme is not only scalable to a large EV population but also resilient to the dynamic EV arrivals. Through simulations, we demonstrate that the locally optimal scheduling scheme can achieve a close performance compared to the globally optimal scheduling scheme.

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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.214
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations781
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Smart GridSame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207