MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multi-Agent Distributed V2G Scheduling Optimization via Double Deep Q-Networks

2025· article· W7125964710 on OpenAlexaff
Jinfeng Li, Qingliao Feng, Ying Zhao, Run Tang, Yu Yao, Yishun Zhu, Fengwei Liu, Lamei Wang, Chunyan Chen, Jie Ren

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Vehicles and Infrastructure
Canadian institutions123 Certification (Canada)
FundersChina Southern Power Grid
KeywordsReinforcement learningScalabilityScheduling (production processes)GridRobustness (evolution)ElectricitySmart gridGrid computingQueueing theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Under the “Dual Carbon” strategy, the largescale adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) presents both opportunities for green transportation and challenges for power grid load management. This paper proposes a distributed multiagent reinforcement learning scheduling method based on a double deep Q-network architecture (DQ-MARLS) to address multi-objective charging coordination in vehicle-grid interaction scenarios. Each charging pile is modeled as an independent agent with local state perception and deep policy learning. The state space integrates queuing status, electricity price, and grid load, while the action space is dynamically generated based on user availability. An$\varepsilon$-greedy strategy and double Q-learning mechanism are adopted to improve decision robustness and mitigate$Q$-value overestimation. A multi-objective reward function that considers user satisfaction, operator profit, and grid performance guides the agents toward coordinated and optimal scheduling. To support strategy training and performance evaluation, this paper constructs a simulation platform with approximately$\mathbf{1, 0 0 0}$virtual electric vehicle users dynamically interacting in a multi-region, multi-type charging station, and multi-time period environment to generate structured data. The experimental results show that the proposed method exhibits superior control performance and scalability compared to traditional heuristic and disordered scheduling strategies in terms of improving grid operation stability and reducing peak loads.

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)0.002
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectric Vehicles and InfrastructureFrench-language works237,207