MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimal Day-Ahead BESS Schedules in Microgrids: A Comparison Between Reinforcement Learning and Meta-Heuristic Algorithms

2025· article· W7127531193 on OpenAlexaff
Yasmin Dibai, Ethan Lam, Behdad Faridpak, Arman Ghasaei, Mariana Resener

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrogridReinforcement learningScheduling (production processes)GridElectric power systemGenetic algorithmJob shop schedulingOptimization algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The integration of distributed energy resources (DERs), including battery energy storage systems (BESS), into the power grid requires efficient scheduling strategies to optimize economic operation. This paper presents a comparative analysis of two optimization approaches for day-ahead BESS scheduling: a Deep Q-Network (DQN)-based reinforcement learning model and a genetic algorithm (GA)-based optimization model. Both models are applied to a microgrid case study using real-world data from Maryland, USA. The results demonstrate significant cost reductions for the microgrid operator (MGO) and underscore the potential of AI-driven approaches for improving BESS scheduling decisions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.251 · 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.

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 topicMicrogrid Control and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207