MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212441087 · doi:10.3390/en14227481

Cost-Optimized Microgrid Coalitions Using Bayesian Reinforcement Learning

2021· article· en· W3212441087 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohammad Amin Sadeghi, Shahram Mollahasani, Melike Erol‐Kantarci

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMicrogridReinforcement learningRenewable energyScheduling (production processes)Computer scienceMathematical optimizationEngineeringArtificial intelligenceControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Microgrids are empowered by the advances in renewable energy generation, which enable the microgrids to generate the required energy for supplying their loads and trade the surplus energy to other microgrids or the macrogrid. Microgrids need to optimize the scheduling of their demands and energy levels while trading their surplus with others to minimize the overall cost. This can be affected by various factors such as variations in demand, energy generation, and competition among microgrids due to their dynamic nature. Thus, reaching optimal scheduling is challenging due to the uncertainty caused by the generation/consumption of renewable energy and the complexity of interconnected microgrids and their interplay. Previous works mainly rely on modeling-based approaches and the availability of precise information on microgrid dynamics. This paper addresses the energy trading problem among microgrids by minimizing the cost while uncertainty exists in microgrid generation and demand. To this end, a Bayesian coalitional reinforcement learning-based model is introduced to minimize the energy trading cost among microgrids by forming stable coalitions. The results show that the proposed model can minimize the cost up to 23% with respect to the coalitional game theory model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.659
Threshold uncertainty score0.805

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergiesSame topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207