Distributed Algorithms for Internet-of-Things-enabled Prosumer Markets: A Control Theoretic Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Internet-of-Things (IoT) enables the development of sharing economy applications. In many sharing economy scenarios, agents both produce as well as consume a resource; we call them prosumers. A community of prosumers agrees to sell excess resource to another community in a prosumer market. In this chapter, we propose a control theoretic approach to regulate the number of prosumers in a prosumer community, where each prosumer has a cost function that is coupled through its time-averaged production and consumption of the resource. Furthermore, each prosumer runs its distributed algorithm and takes only binary decisions in a probabilistic way, whether to produce one unit of the resource or not and to consume one unit of the resource or not. In the proposed approach, prosumers do not explicitly exchange information with each other due to privacy reasons, but little exchange of information is required for feedback signals, broadcast by a central agency. In the proposed approach, prosumers achieve the optimal values asymptotically. Furthermore, the proposed approach is suitable to implement in an IoT context with minimal demands on infrastructure. We describe two use cases; community-based car sharing and collaborative energy storage for prosumer markets. We also present simulation results to check the efficacy of the algorithms.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".