MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945413977 · doi:10.1109/tsg.2019.2913818

A Price-Maker/Price-Taker Model for the Operation of Battery Storage Systems in Electricity Markets

2019· article· en· W2945413977 on OpenAlexaff
Juan Arteaga, Hamidreza Zareipour

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Smart Grid · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectricity marketCompetitor analysisEnergy storageElectricityEnergy marketProfit (economics)Computer scienceMicroeconomicsEconomicsOperations researchBusinessEngineeringElectrical engineeringMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this paper is to develop models for estimating the potential profit of a battery storage system that provides multiple services in a competitive electricity market. We assume the size of the battery is small relative to the energy market volume and its actions do not impact the energy market outcomes; thus, it is a price-taker in the energy market. However, considering the relatively smaller market volume for ancillary services, we consider the battery’s strategies to impact the outcomes of the markets for frequency regulation service, spinning reserve, and non-spinning reserve. An optimization model is proposed considering the uncertainties in energy prices, the offers of ancillary services by competitors, and the energy deployment in ancillary services markets. We employ robust and stochastic optimization approaches to account for the different nature of each uncertain variable. The scheduling is done in day-ahead and is later refined closer to real time. Numerical results are provided based on real-life data.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations120
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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