Tuning of renewable energy bids based on energy risk management: Enhanced microgrids with pareto‐optimal profits for the utility and prosumers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The increasing penetration of renewable energy sources (RES) and electric vehicles (EVs) demands the building of a microgrid energy portfolio that is cost‐effective and robust against generation uncertainties (energy risk). Energy risk may trigger financial risk in the local energy market, depending on bid values, cost of generation and price of upstream grid power. In this study, a microgrid energy portfolio is built based on adjustments to both the financial and energy risks. These risks are managed in two ways: (1) by pre‐tuning and prioritizing the bid prices for wind and solar energy sources based on their relative levels of energy risk as quantified through a conditional value‐at‐risk (CVaR) approach; and (2) by co‐optimizing the conflicting profits of the utility and prosumers using non‐dominated sorting particle swarm optimization (NSPSO) to obtain a risk‐adjusted Pareto‐optimal energy mix. Thus, the utility predicts the net power balancing cost from the scheduling time horizon, thereby moderating the adverse effect that the uncertainties in renewable energy could have on the collective welfare. The proposed method is tested on a grid‐connected CIGRE low‐voltage (LV) benchmark microgrid with solar and wind sources, microturbines, and EVs. The results demonstrate that the obtained portfolio is realistic, welfare‐optimized and cost‐efficient.
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".