Secure and Robust Demand Response Using Stackelberg Game Model and Energy Blockchain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Demand response (DR) has been studied widely in the smart grid literature, however, there is still a significant gap in approaches that address security, privacy, and robustness of settlement processes simultaneously. The need for security and robustness emerges as a vital property, as Internet of Things (IoT) devices become part of the smart grid; in the form of smart meters, home energy management systems (HEMSs), intelligent transformers, and so on. In this paper, we use energy blockchain to secure energy transactions among customers and the utility. In addition, we formulate a mixed-strategy stochastic game model to address uncertainties in DR contributions of agents and achieve optimal demand response decisions. This model utilizes the processing hardware of customers for block mining, stores customer DR agreements as distributed ledgers, and offers a smart contract and consensus algorithm for energy transaction validation. We use a real dataset of residential demand profiles and photovoltaic (PV) generation to validate the performance of the proposed scheme. The results show the impact of electric vehicle (EV) discharging and customer demand reduction on increasing the probability of successful block mining and improving customer profits. Moreover, the results demonstrate the security and robustness of our consensus algorithm for detecting malicious activities.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".