A Compendium of Performance Metrics, Pricing Schemes, Optimization Objectives, and Solution Methodologies of Demand Side Management for the Smart Grid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The curtailing of consumers’ peak hours demands and filling the gap caused by the mismatch between generation and utilization in power systems is a challenging task and also a very hot topic in the current research era. Researchers of the conventional power grid in the traditional power setup are confronting difficulties to figure out the above problem. Smart grid technology can handle these issues efficiently. In the smart grid, consumer demand can be efficiently managed and handled by employing demand-side management (DSM) algorithms. In general, DSM is an important element of smart grid technology. It can shape the consumers’ electricity demand curve according to the given load curve provided by the utilities/supplier. In this survey, we focused on DSM and potential applications of DSM in the smart grid. The review in this paper focuses on the research done over the last decade, to discuss the key concepts of DSM schemes employed for consumers’ demand management. We review DSM schemes under various categories, i.e., direct load reduction, load scheduling, DSM based on various pricing schemes, DSM based on optimization types, DSM based on various solution approaches, and home energy management based DSM. A comprehensive review of DSM performance metrics, optimization objectives, and solution methodologies is’ also provided in this survey. The role of distributed renewable energy resources (DERs) in achieving the optimization objectives and performance metrics is also revealed. The unpredictable nature of DERs and their impact on DSM are also exposed. The motivation of this paper is to contribute by providing a better understanding of DSM and the usage of DERs that can satisfy consumers’ electricity demand with efficient scheduling to achieve the performance metrics and optimization objectives.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
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".