MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413431817 · doi:10.3390/s25175226

Multi-Agent DDPG-Based Multi-Device Charging Scheduling for IIoT Smart Grids

2025· article· en· W4413431817 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Haiyong Zeng, Yuanyan Huang, Kaijie Zhan, Zichao Yu, Hongyan Zhu, Fangyan Li

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Guangxi ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaBritish Columbia Innovation CouncilNatural Science Foundation of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region
KeywordsScheduling (production processes)Computer scienceSmart gridDistributed computingEmbedded systemMaterials scienceEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As electric vehicles (EVs) gain widespread adoption in industrial environments supported by Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) smart grids technology, coordinated charging of multiple EVs has become vital for maintaining grid stability. In response to the scalability challenges faced by traditional algorithms in multi-device environments and the limitations of discrete action spaces in continuous control scenarios, this paper proposes a dynamic charging scheduling algorithm for EVs based on Multi-Agent Deep Deterministic Policy Gradient (MADDPG). The algorithm combines real-time electricity prices, battery status monitoring, and distributed sensor data to dynamically optimize charging and discharging strategies of multiple EVs in continuous action spaces. The goal is to reduce charging costs and balance grid load through coordinated multi-agent learning. Experimental results show that, compared with baseline methods, the proposed MADDPG algorithm achieves a 41.12% cost reduction over a 30-day evaluation period. Additionally, it effectively adapts to price fluctuations and user demand changes through Vehicle-to-Grid technology, optimizing charging time allocation and enhancing grid stability.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.888

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations4
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207