A Game Theory Strategy-Based Bidding Evaluation for Power Generation Market
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a deregulated power market, the economical-risk due to real-time pricing is critical as it is not permitted to alter the decisions taken once. The existing generation market needs improvement in terms of enhancing its effectiveness and reliability. This article presents a game-theoretic approach-based bidding strategy decision-making through a case study. In this case, three thermal generating units feed three different constant loads for base load demand, one at a time. The economic load dispatch has been obtained using MATLAB software applying the particle swarm optimization (PSO) method. Three different bidding strategies for individual generators have been chosen to create 27 combinations to create data where the zero-sum game theory is applied. The marginal costs are calculated for each of the 27 combinations to formulate a game theory matrix. The game theory dominance method is then applied to obtain the market clearing price (MCP). The proposed methodology can help the GENCOs in making a profit or reducing the risk of making a loss by making a judicious selection among the possible available 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.
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 it