Market Power Mitigation in Transmission Expansion Planning Problems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The exercise of market power through network constraints in electricity markets can lead to high energy prices far from competitive prices. Traditional transmission expansion planning problem formulations do not consider strategic behavior of market agents. Therefore, they cannot capture the potential exercise of market power. In this paper, a predictor-corrector iterative algorithm is proposed to deal with market power mitigation in market-oriented transmission expansion planning problems. The predictor step consists of the solution of an equilibrium market model based on the conjectured supply function. The corrector step is a conventional transmission expansion planning posed as a mixed integer linear programming problem, where the feasible region is dynamically updated taking into account the results from the predictor step. Lerner index and other indices are used to quantify the potential market power. The algorithm finds the minimum cost expansion plan that avoids the exercise of market power through network congestion. The cost of this expansion plan is only slightly greater than the cost of a conventional expansion plan. The approach is illustrated using the 6-Bus Garver and the IEEE-24 RTS test systems.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it