Demand-Side Management by Regulating Charging and Discharging of the EV, ESS, and Utilizing Renewable Energy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolution in microgrid technologies as well as the integration of electric vehicles (EVs), energy storage systems (ESSs), and renewable energy sources will all play a significant role in balancing the planned generation of electricity and its real-time use. We propose a real-time decentralized demand-side management (RDCDSM) to adjust the real-time residential load to follow a preplanned day-ahead energy generation by the microgrid, based on predicted customers' aggregate load. A deviation from the predicted demand at the time of consumption is assumed to result in additional cost or penalty inflicted on the deviated customers. To develop our system, we formulate a game with mixed strategy which in the first phase (i.e., prediction phase) allows each customer to process the day ahead raw predicted demand to reduce the anticipated electricity cost by generating a flattened curve for its forecasted future demand. Then, in the second stage (i.e., allocation phase), customers play another game with mixed strategy to mitigate the deviation between the instantaneous real-time consumption and the day-ahead predicted one. To achieve this, customers exploit renewable energy and ESSs and decide optimal strategies for their charging/discharging, taking into account their operational constraints. RDCDSM will help the microgrid operator to better deal with uncertainties in the system through better planning its day-ahead electricity generation and purchase, thus increasing the quality of power delivery to the customer. We evaluate the performance of our method against a centralized allocation and an existing decentralized EV charge control noncooperative game method both of which rely on a day ahead demand prediction without any refinement. We run simulations with various microgrid configurations, by varying the load and generated power, and compare the outcomes.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".