Multi-Agent Optimization for Residential Demand Response under Real-Time Pricing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Demand response (DR) programs encourage consumers to adapt the time of using electricity based on certain factors, such as cost of electricity, renewable energy availability, and ancillary request. It is one of the most economical methods to improve power system stability and energy efficiency. Residential electricity consumption occupies approximately one-third of global electricity usage and has great potential in DR applications. In this study, we propose a multi-agent optimization approach to incorporate residential DR flexibility into the power system and electricity market. The agents collectively optimize their own interests; meanwhile, the global optimal solution is achieved. The agent perceives its environment, predicts electricity consumption, and forecasts electricity price, based on which it takes intelligent actions to minimize electrical energy cost and time delay of using household appliances. The decision-making action is formulated into a convex program (CP) model. A distributed heuristic algorithm is developed to solve the proposed multi-agent optimization model. Case studies and numerical analysis show promising results with low variation of the aggregated load profile and reduction of electrical energy cost. The proposed approaches can be utilized to investigate various emerging technologies and DR strategies.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".