Distributed coordination of electric vehicles charging station and home energy management systems in residential neighborhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The uncoordinated management of Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging Station Management Systems (CSMS) and Home Energy Management Systems (HEMSs) has been shown to have detrimental effects on the distribution system, leading to the creation of new demand peaks (rebound) and increased power loss in the grid. This paper develops a distributed coordination approach for managing CSMS and HEMSs agents, aimed at mitigating the negative impacts of uncoordinated consumers within a neighborhood. A comprehensive model of consumer flexibility is developed by integrating residential demands with detailed CSMS features, including EV charging schedules and energy requirements, as well as the impact of temperature on charging duration. The proposed coordination technique not only fulfills individual objectives of agents but also addresses shared objectives of the neighborhood, which are distributed among all agents by a coordinator. The technique aims to harmonize HEMSs and CSMS consumption profiles to smooth out the aggregated profile and reduce the neighborhood’s total energy costs. Afterward, an incentive allocation mechanism has been devised to assess the marginal contributions of agents and distribute rewards accordingly. The proposed CSMS and HEMSs coordination is evaluated through case studies encompassing diverse preferences, coordination levels, as well as parameters uncertainties. Additionally, the proposed approach is compared against both the uncoordinated and indirect coordination cases, implemented using proximal dynamic prices. The evaluation demonstrates that, compared to the baseline scenario, the load factor improves significantly by up to 35%, and the total neighborhood discounted bill is reduced by up to 27%. • Distributed coordination harmonizes CSMS and HEMS profiles to flatten aggregated demand. • Incentive allocation mechanism evaluates agent contributions and distributes rewards fairly. • Coordination reduces total neighborhood bill by up to 27% and improves load factor by 35%. • Sensitivity analysis confirms framework’s robustness against parameter uncertainties.
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 | 0.002 | 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".