Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
129 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
28 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 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

Improving Sequential Market Coordination via Value-oriented Renewable Energy Forecasting (2405.09004v2)

Published 15 May 2024 in eess.SY, cs.LG, and cs.SY

Abstract: Large penetration of renewable energy sources (RESs) brings huge uncertainty into the electricity markets. The current deterministic clearing approach in the day-ahead (DA) market, where RESs participate based on expected production, has been criticized for causing a lack of coordination between the DA and real-time (RT) markets, leading to high overall operating costs. Previous works indicate that improving day-ahead RES entering quantities can significantly mitigate the drawbacks of deterministic clearing. In this work, we propose using a trained forecasting model, referred to as value-oriented forecasting, to determine RES Improved Entering Quantities (RIEQ) more efficiently during the operational phase. Unlike traditional models that minimize statistical forecasting errors, our approach trains model parameters to minimize the expected overall operating costs across both DA and RT markets. We derive the exact form of the loss function used for training, which becomes piecewise linear when market clearing is modeled by linear programs. Additionally, we provide the analytical gradient of the loss function with respect to the forecast, enabling an efficient training strategy. Numerical studies demonstrate that our forecasts significantly reduce overall operating costs for deterministic market clearing compared to conventional forecasts based on expected RES production.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (20)
  1. “Share of renewables in electricity production,” https://yearbook.enerdata.net/renewables/renewable-in-electricity-production-share.html.
  2. J. Kazempour and B. F. Hobbs, “Value of flexible resources, virtual bidding, and self-scheduling in two-settlement electricity markets with wind generation—part i: Principles and competitive model,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 749–759, 2017.
  3. J. M. Morales, A. J. Conejo, K. Liu, and J. Zhong, “Pricing electricity in pools with wind producers,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 1366–1376, 2012.
  4. V. M. Zavala, K. Kim, M. Anitescu, and J. Birge, “A stochastic electricity market clearing formulation with consistent pricing properties,” Operations Research, vol. 65, no. 3, pp. 557–576, 2017.
  5. J. Kazempour, P. Pinson, and B. F. Hobbs, “A stochastic market design with revenue adequacy and cost recovery by scenario: Benefits and costs,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 3531–3545, 2018.
  6. W. B. Powell and S. Ghadimi, “The parametric cost function approximation: A new approach for multistage stochastic programming,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2201.00258, 2022.
  7. J. Mays, “Quasi-stochastic electricity markets,” INFORMS Journal on Optimization, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 350–372, 2021.
  8. J. M. Morales, M. Zugno, S. Pineda, and P. Pinson, “Electricity market clearing with improved scheduling of stochastic production,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 235, no. 3, pp. 765–774, 2014.
  9. D. Zhao, V. Dvorkin, S. Delikaraoglou, A. Botterud et al., “Uncertainty-informed renewable energy scheduling: A scalable bilevel framework,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.13905, 2022.
  10. V. Dvorkin, S. Delikaraoglou, and J. M. Morales, “Setting reserve requirements to approximate the efficiency of the stochastic dispatch,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 1524–1536, 2018.
  11. A. Stratigakos, S. Camal, A. Michiorri, and G. Kariniotakis, “Prescriptive trees for integrated forecasting and optimization applied in trading of renewable energy,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 4696–4708, 2022.
  12. X. Chen, Y. Yang, Y. Liu, and L. Wu, “Feature-driven economic improvement for network-constrained unit commitment: A closed-loop predict-and-optimize framework,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 3104–3118, 2021.
  13. J. M. Morales, M. Muñoz, and S. Pineda, “Prescribing net demand for two-stage electricity generation scheduling,” Operations Research Perspectives, vol. 10, p. 100268, 2023.
  14. P. Donti, B. Amos, and J. Z. Kolter, “Task-based end-to-end model learning in stochastic optimization,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 30, 2017.
  15. P. Pinson, C. Chevallier, and G. N. Kariniotakis, “Trading wind generation from short-term probabilistic forecasts of wind power,” IEEE transactions on Power Systems, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 1148–1156, 2007.
  16. A. N. Elmachtoub and P. Grigas, “Smart “predict, then optimize”,” Management Science, vol. 68, no. 1, pp. 9–26, 2022.
  17. Y. Zhang, M. Jia, H. Wen, Y. Bian, and Y. Shi, “Toward value-oriented renewable energy forecasting: An iterative learning approach,” 2024.
  18. R. D. Zimmerman, C. E. Murillo-Sánchez, and R. J. Thomas, “Matpower: Steady-state operations, planning, and analysis tools for power systems research and education,” IEEE Transactions on power systems, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 12–19, 2010.
  19. F. Borrelli, A. Bemporad, and M. Morari, “Geometric algorithm for multiparametric linear programming,” Journal of optimization theory and applications, vol. 118, pp. 515–540, 2003.
  20. M. Landry, T. P. Erlinger, D. Patschke, and C. Varrichio, “Probabilistic gradient boosting machines for gefcom2014 wind forecasting,” International Journal of Forecasting, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 1061–1066, 2016.
Citations (1)

Summary

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

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets