EV Overnight Charging Strategy in Residential Sector: Case of Winter Season in Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electric Vehicle (EV) technologies offer a leading-edge solution for clean transportation and have evolved substantially in recent years. The growing market and policies of governments predict EV massive penetration shortly; however, their large deployment faces some resistances such as the high prices compared to Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) cars, the required infrastructure, the liability for novelty and standardisation. During winter periods of cold countries, since the use of heating systems increases, the peak power may produce stress to the grid. This fact, combined with EVs high penetration, during charging periods inside of high consumption hours might overload the network, becoming a threat to its stability. This article presents a framework to evaluate load shifting strategies to reschedule the EV charging to lower grid load periods. The undesirable “rebound” effect of load shifting strategies is confirmed, leading us to our EV local overnight charging strategy (EV-ONCS). Our strategy combines the forecast of residential demand using probabilistic distribution from historical consumption, prediction of the EV expected availability to charge and the charging strategy itself. EV-ONCS avoids demand rebound of classic methods and allows a peak-to-average ratio reduction demonstrating the relief for the grid with very low implementation cost.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".