ADMM-Based Hierarchical Single-Loop Framework for EV Charging Scheduling Considering Power Flow Constraints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents a three-layer hierarchical distributed framework for optimal electric vehicle charging scheduling (EVCS). The proposed hierarchical EVCS structure includes a distribution system operator (DSO) at the top layer, electric vehicle aggregators (EVAs) at the middle layer, and electric vehicles (EVs) charging stations at the bottom layer. A single-loop iterative algorithm is developed to solve the EVCS problem by combining the alternating direction method of multipliers (ADMM) and the distribution line power flow model (DistFlow). Using the single-loop structure, the primal variables of all agents are updated simultaneously at every iteration resulting in a reduced number of iterations and faster convergence. The developed framework is employed to provide charging cost minimization at the EV charging stations level, peak load shaving at the EVAs level, and voltage regulation at the DSO level. In order to further improve the performance of the optimization framework, a neural network-based load forecasting model is implemented to include the uncertainties related to non-EV residential load demand. The efficiency and the optimality of the proposed EVCS framework are evaluated through numerical simulations, conducted for a modified IEEE 13 bus test feeder with different EV penetration levels.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".