Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Preprint |
| Publicado: |
2026
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.03559 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| _version_ | 1866911567463841792 |
|---|---|
| author | Chen, Liudong Kim, Hyemi Elmachtoub, Adam N. Xu, Bolun |
| author_facet | Chen, Liudong Kim, Hyemi Elmachtoub, Adam N. Xu, Bolun |
| contents | A virtual power plant (VPP) is operated by an aggregator that acts as a market intermediary, aggregating consumers to participate in wholesale power markets. By setting incentive prices, the aggregator induces consumers to sell energy and profits by providing this aggregated energy to the market. This supply is enabled by consumers' flexibility to adjust electricity consumption in response to market conditions. However, heterogeneity in flexibility means that profit-maximizing VPP pricing can create inequalities in participation and benefit allocation across consumers. In this paper, we develop a fairness-aware pricing framework to analyze how different fairness notions reshape system performance, measured by consumer Nash welfare, total consumer utility, and social welfare. We consider three fairness criteria: energy fairness, which ensures equitable energy provision; price fairness, which ensures similar incentive prices; and utility fairness, which ensures comparable levels of consumer utility. We model the aggregator-consumer interaction as a Stackelberg game and derive consumers' optimal responses to incentive prices. Using a stylized model, we show that profit-only pricing systematically disadvantages less flexible consumers. We further show that energy fairness can either improve or worsen all performance measures, and gains across most measures arise only at moderate fairness levels. Surprisingly, price fairness never benefits less flexible consumers, even when it reduces price disparities. By contrast, utility fairness protects less flexible consumers without benefiting more flexible ones. We validate our findings using data from an experiment in Norway under a tiered pricing scheme. Our results provide regulators and VPP operators with a systematic map linking fairness definitions and enforcement levels to operational and welfare outcomes. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2604_03559 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | Fair Aggregation in Virtual Power Plants Chen, Liudong Kim, Hyemi Elmachtoub, Adam N. Xu, Bolun Computer Science and Game Theory Systems and Control A virtual power plant (VPP) is operated by an aggregator that acts as a market intermediary, aggregating consumers to participate in wholesale power markets. By setting incentive prices, the aggregator induces consumers to sell energy and profits by providing this aggregated energy to the market. This supply is enabled by consumers' flexibility to adjust electricity consumption in response to market conditions. However, heterogeneity in flexibility means that profit-maximizing VPP pricing can create inequalities in participation and benefit allocation across consumers. In this paper, we develop a fairness-aware pricing framework to analyze how different fairness notions reshape system performance, measured by consumer Nash welfare, total consumer utility, and social welfare. We consider three fairness criteria: energy fairness, which ensures equitable energy provision; price fairness, which ensures similar incentive prices; and utility fairness, which ensures comparable levels of consumer utility. We model the aggregator-consumer interaction as a Stackelberg game and derive consumers' optimal responses to incentive prices. Using a stylized model, we show that profit-only pricing systematically disadvantages less flexible consumers. We further show that energy fairness can either improve or worsen all performance measures, and gains across most measures arise only at moderate fairness levels. Surprisingly, price fairness never benefits less flexible consumers, even when it reduces price disparities. By contrast, utility fairness protects less flexible consumers without benefiting more flexible ones. We validate our findings using data from an experiment in Norway under a tiered pricing scheme. Our results provide regulators and VPP operators with a systematic map linking fairness definitions and enforcement levels to operational and welfare outcomes. |
| title | Fair Aggregation in Virtual Power Plants |
| topic | Computer Science and Game Theory Systems and Control |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.03559 |