Learning a Multi-Agent Controller for Shared Energy Storage System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deployment of shared energy storage systems (SESS) allows users to use the stored energy to meet their own energy demands while saving energy costs without installing private energy storage equipment. In this paper, we consider a group of building users in the community with SESS, and each user can schedule power injection from the grid as well as SESS according to their demand and real-time electricity price to minimize energy cost and meet energy demand simultaneously. SESS is encouraged to charge when the price is low, thus providing as much energy as possible for users while achieving energy savings. However, due to the complex dynamics of buildings and real-time external signals, it is a challenging task to find high-performance power dispatch decisions in real-time. By designing a multi-agent reinforcement learning framework with state-aware reward functions, SESS and users can realize power scheduling to meet the users’ energy demand and SESS’s charging/discharging balance without additional communication, so as to achieve energy optimization. Compared with the baseline approach without the participation of the SESS, the energy cost is saved by around 2.37% to 21.58%.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".