Reinforcement Mechanism Design for Electric Vehicle Demand Response in Microgrid Charging Stations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reinforcement learning has become an important scheduling solution with many successes in markets with dynamic pricing options, e.g., electric vehicle charging in a deregulated electricity market. However, the highly-uncertain requests and partially-unknown individual preferences remain major challenges to effective demand responses in the user-centric environment. For charging stations who aim to maximize the long-term revenue in this fast-growing market, an accurate estimate of user's sensitivity, or acceptance, of the prices they offered to the potential customers is the key to the success of dynamic pricing. While most existing pricing schemes assume users will consistently follow stable patterns that are observable or inferrable by the charging service provider, it remains crucial to consider how users may be influenced by historic prices they have observed and react strategically to decide optimal charging demands that can maximize their utilities. To overcome this limitation, this paper presents a new framework based on reinforcement mechanism design to determine the optimal charging price in a mechanism design setting, which can optimize the long-term revenue of charging stations as well as the social welfare of users with private utility functions. Specifically, the strategic interaction between the station and users is modelled as a discrete finite Markov decision process, a Q-learning-based dynamic pricing mechanism is proposed to explore how price affects users' demands over a sequence of time. The experiments demonstrate that our pricing mechanism outperforms the predetermined time-of-use pricing in maximizing the long-term revenue of the charging station.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".