Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
194 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
45 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Data Monetization Pathways and Complex Dynamic Game Equilibrium Analysis in the Energy Industry (2403.08082v3)

Published 12 Mar 2024 in cs.GT

Abstract: As the most critical production factor in the era of the digital economy, data will have a significant impact on social production and development. Energy enterprises possess data that is interconnected with multiple industries, characterized by diverse needs, sensitivity, and long-term nature. The path to monetizing energy enterprises' data is challenging yet crucial. This paper explores the game-theoretic aspects of the data monetization process in energy enterprises by considering the relationships between enterprises and trading platforms. We construct a class of game decision models and study their equilibrium strategies. Our analysis shows that enterprises and platforms can adjust respective benefits by regulating the wholesale price of data and the intensity of data value mining to form a benign equilibrium state. Furthermore, by integrating nonlinear dynamical theory, we discuss the dynamic characteristics present in multi-period repeated game processes. We find that decision-makers should keep the adjustment parameters and initial states within reasonable ranges in multi-period dynamic decision-making to avoid market failure. Finally, based on the theoretical and numerical analysis, we provide decision insights and recommendations for enterprise decision-making to facilitate data monetization through strategic interactions with trading platforms.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (29)
  1. C. Klos, P. Spieth, T. Clauss, and C. Klusmann, “Digital transformation of incumbent firms: A business model innovation perspective,” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 70, no. 6, pp. 2017–2033, 2023.
  2. C. Rocha, C. Quandt, F. Deschamps, S. Philbin, and G. Cruzara, “Collaborations for digital transformation: Case studies of industry 4.0 in brazil,” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 70, no. 7, pp. 2404–2418, 2023.
  3. X. Zhang, W. T. Yue, Y. Yu, and X. Zhang, “How to monetize data: An economic analysis of data monetization strategies under competition,” Decision Support Systems, vol. 173, p. 114012, 2023.
  4. J. Wang, F. Gao, Y. Zhou, Q. Guo, C.-W. Tan, J. Song, and Y. Wang, “Data sharing in energy systems,” Advances in Applied Energy, vol. 10, p. 100132, 2023.
  5. J. Wang, H. Zhong, Z. Yang, M. Wang, D. M. Kammen, Z. Liu, Z. Ma, Q. Xia, and C. Kang, “Exploring the trade-offs between electric heating policy and carbon mitigation in china,” NATURE COMMUNICATIONS, vol. 11, no. 1, DEC 27 2020.
  6. M. Abbasi, J. Prieto, A. Shahraki, and J. M. Corchado, “Industrial data monetization: A blockchain-based industrial iot data trading system,” Internet of Things, vol. 24, p. 100959, 2023.
  7. R. Song, B. Xiao, Y. Song, S. Guo, and Y. Yang, “A survey of blockchain-based schemes for data sharing and exchange,” IEEE Transactions on Big Data, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 1477–1495, 2023.
  8. K. Figueredo, D. Seed, and C. Wang, “A scalable, standards-based approach for iot data sharing and ecosystem monetization,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 9, no. 8, pp. 5645–5652, 2022.
  9. P. Ritala, J. Keränen, J. Fishburn, and M. Ruokonen, “Selling and monetizing data in b2b markets: Four data-driven value propositions,” Technovation, vol. 130, p. 102935, 2024.
  10. A. S. Bataineh, J. Bentahar, R. Mizouni, O. Abdel Wahab, G. Rjoub, and M. E. Barachi, “Cloud computing as a platform for monetizing data services: A two-sided game business model,” IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 1336–1350, 2022.
  11. C. Gonçalves, P. Pinson, and R. J. Bessa, “Towards data markets in renewable energy forecasting,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 533–542, 2021.
  12. H. Yang and W. Chen, “Retailer-driven carbon emission abatement with consumer environmental awareness and carbon tax: Revenue-sharing versus cost-sharing,” Omega, vol. 78, pp. 179–191, 2018.
  13. Q. Meng, M. Li, W. Liu, Z. Li, and J. Zhang, “Pricing policies of dual-channel green supply chain: Considering government subsidies and consumers’ dual preferences,” Sustainable Production and Consumption, vol. 26, pp. 1021–1030, 2021.
  14. T. Chu and W. Zhou, “Complex dynamics of R&D competition with one-way spillover based on intellectual property protection,” Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, vol. 163, p. 112491, 2022.
  15. M. Rasti-Barzoki and I. Moon, “A game theoretic approach for analyzing electric and gasoline-based vehicles’ competition in a supply chain under government sustainable strategies: A case study of South Korea,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 146, p. 111139, 2021.
  16. N. Rezaei, A. Fattahi Meyabadi, and M. Deihimi, “A game theory based demand-side management in a smart microgrid considering price-responsive loads via a twofold sustainable energy justice portfolio,” Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, vol. 52, p. 102273, 2022.
  17. N. Feng, J. Chen, H. Feng, and M. Li, “Promotional pricing strategies for platform vendors: Competition between first- and third-party products,” Decision Support Systems, vol. 151, p. 113627, 2021.
  18. X. Zhen, S. Xu, Y. Li, and D. Shi, “When and how should a retailer use third-party platform channels? the impact of spillover effects,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 301, no. 2, pp. 624–637, 2022.
  19. C. Liu, Q. Zhou, J. Lv, and Y. Jiang, “Sales price and service level on a dedicated online service platform: The dynamics under competing reference quality,” Computers & Industrial Engineering, vol. 162, p. 107779, 2021.
  20. G.-I. Bischi and A. Naimzada, “Global analysis of a dynamic duopoly game with bounded rationality,” in Advances in Dynamic Games and Applications, J. A. Filar, V. Gaitsgory, and K. Mizukami, Eds.   Boston, MA: Birkhäuser Boston, 2000, pp. 361–385.
  21. G.-I. Bischi and F. Lamantia, “Nonlinear duopoly games with positive cost externalities due to spillover effects,” Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 701–721, 2002.
  22. X. Yang, Y. Peng, Y. Xiao, and X. Wu, “Nonlinear dynamics of a duopoly Stackelberg game with marginal costs,” Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, vol. 123, pp. 185–191, 2019.
  23. Y. Cao, W. Zhou, T. Chu, and Y. Chang, “Global dynamics and synchronization in a duopoly game with bounded rationality and consumer surplus,” International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, vol. 29, no. 11, p. 1930031, 2019.
  24. Y. Zhang and T. Zhang, “Complex dynamics in a closed-loop supply chain with risk aversion and fairness concerns under supply disruption,” International Journal of Bifurcation and Chaos, vol. 31, no. 09, p. 2150132, 2021.
  25. X. Luo, G. Chen, B. Wang, and J. Fang, “Hybrid control of period-doubling bifurcation and chaos in discrete nonlinear dynamical systems,” Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 775–783, 2003.
  26. X. Zhang, R. Sui, B. Dan, and Z. Guan, “Bilateral value-added services and pricing strategies of the third-party platform considering the cross-network externality,” Computers & Industrial Engineering, vol. 155, p. 107196, 2021.
  27. X. Zhen and S. Xu, “Who should introduce the third-party platform channel under different pricing strategies?” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 299, no. 1, pp. 168–182, 2022.
  28. J. Ma and Z. Wang, “Optimal pricing and complex analysis for low-carbon apparel supply chains,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, vol. 111, pp. 610–629, 2022.
  29. X. Liu, W. Zhou, and L. Xie, “Dynamic competitive game study of a green supply chain with r&d level,” Computers & Industrial Engineering, vol. 163, p. 107785, 2022.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now