MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414054176 · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3607516

Optimal Photovoltaic Energy Allocation in Residential Renewable Energy Communities

2025· article· en· W4414054176 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Marc Girona-Badia, Pablo Moreno, Gerard Laguna, Jordi Cipriano, Álvaro Luna

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceEuropean CommissionMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades
KeywordsRenewable energySoftware deploymentRemunerationPhotovoltaic systemLinear programmingEnergy consumptionProduction (economics)Electricity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective deployment of Renewable Energy Communities (RECs) is essential for the success of Europe’s energy transition. However, there are no clear criteria for sharing energy generation among community members, which conditions the rhythm of RECs penetration. The lack of transversal legislation gave rise to different approaches in EU countries for solving this issue, with the calculation of ’a priori’ and ’a posteriori’ energy sharing coefficients being the most extended ones. Nevertheless, it is still necessary to develop better optimization algorithms to make the most of RECs, to minimize the surplus of energy, and improve payback among end-users and their impact on the energy system. This paper gives an overview of the state-of-the-art and proposes improvements to the linear programming (LP) methodologies devoted to obtaining an optimal calculation of renewable sharing coefficients; able to provide satisfactory results, no matter the size of the REC, while consuming affordable computation resources. The performance of the proposed method has been validated using real generation and consumption data collected from a Spanish DSO, considering both ’a priori’ and ’a posteriori’ remuneration schemes. The results prove the good behaviour of the proposed solution for different REC sizes and operating conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.246
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicSmart Grid Energy ManagementFrench-language works237,207