MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Peer-to-Peer Energy Optimization in V2X Using Reinforcement Learning

2024· article· en· W4400727586 on OpenAlexaff
Alaa Ghabi, Zakariyya Alatoom, Mohsen Guizani, Habib Hamam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGreen IT and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningPeer-to-peerComputer scienceEnergy (signal processing)ReinforcementPeer reviewHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceDistributed computingEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent advancements in renewable energy technologies, along with the energy exchange capabilities of Electric Vehicles (EVs), present new opportunities for enhancing renewable energy management and its integration into traditional power systems. Despite these advancements, challenges such as the pricing of charging and discharging clean energy, and the distribution of available energy supplies persist in the realm of energy trading. Our research addresses these issues by leveraging Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X) technologies, which enable EVs to distribute energy to a wide range of consumers. We introduce a dual-level optimization approach that synchronizes financial incentives with the variable electricity prices at EV charging in the parking. This approach is supported by a state-of-the-art reinforcement learning model that integrates primal-dual optimization with upper-confidence bound techniques. Our model is specifically designed to optimize both power management and the effective use of incentives. The overarching goal of this strategy is to augment the adaptability of Vehicle-to-Grid (V2G) and Vehicle-to-Vehicle systems to encourage user participation in energy exchange processes, thereby promoting a more efficient and integrated renewable energy ecosystem.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGreen IT and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207