A Decentralized Energy Management Framework for Energy Hubs in Dynamic Pricing Markets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With increasing the presence of co- and tri-generating units, energy hub operators are encouraged to optimally schedule the available energy resources in an economic way. This scheduling needs to be run in an online manner due to the uncertainties in energy prices and demands. In this paper, the real-time scheduling problem of energy hubs is formulated in a dynamic pricing market. The energy hubs interaction is modeled as an exact potential game to optimize each energy hub's payments to the electricity and gas utilities, as well as the customers' satisfaction from energy consumption. The potential game approach enables us to study the existence and uniqueness of the Nash equilibrium and to design an online distributed algorithm to achieve that equilibrium. Simulations results show that the proposed algorithm can increase the energy hubs' average payoff by 18.8%. Furthermore, energy service companies can improve the technical performance of energy networks by reducing the peak-to-average ratio in the electricity and natural gas by 27% and 7%, respectively. When compared with a centralized approach with the objective of social welfare, the proposed algorithm has a significantly lower running time at the cost of lower social welfare.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".