MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cost-Aware Dynamic Bayesian Coalitional Game for Energy Trading among Microgrids

2021· article· en· W3179133810 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Amin Sadeghi, Shahram Mollahasani, Melike Erol‐Kantarci

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrogridComputer scienceMathematical optimizationGame theoryScheme (mathematics)ElectricityMinificationEnergy (signal processing)Electricity generationPeer-to-peerOperations researchMicroeconomicsDistributed computingEconomicsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringMathematicsPower (physics)Control (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The future electricity distribution system will be highly impacted by the emergence of peer-to-peer energy trading within microgrid (MG) communities. The idea of peer-to-peer energy trading is to export the surplus energy of a MG to a nearby MG or a group of MGs whose electrical load exceeds their generation. The variations in demand and generation, and the dynamic nature of these communities result in uncertainty on whether MGs will be able to satisfy their trading commitment or not. In this paper, the problem of energy trading among MGs is addressed with the objective of minimizing the cost under uncertainty. A Bayesian coalitional Game (BCG) based scheme is proposed, which helps the MGs to minimize the overall cost by forming stable coalitions. The results show 15% to 30% improvement in terms of cost minimization compared to an existing Q-learning based scheme and a conventional coalitional game theory (CG)-based approach from the literature.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207