A solution based on fuzzy max-min approach to the bi-level programming model of energy and exiramp procurement in day-ahead market

Document Type : Article

Authors

1 Faculty of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Faculty of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

In this paper, we focus on solving the integrated energy and flexiramp procurement problem in the day-ahead market. The problem of energy and ramp procurement could be perfectly analyzed through Stackelberg concept, because of its hierarchical nature of the decision-making process. Such a circumstance is modeled via a bi-level programming, in which suppliers act as leaders and the ISO appear as the follower. The ISO intends to minimize the energy and spinning reserve procurement cost, and the suppliers aim to maximize their profit. To solve the proposed model, a fuzzy max-min approach is applied to maximize the players’ utilities. The objectives and suppliers’ dynamic offers, determined regarding the market clearing prices, are reformulated through fuzzy utility functions. The proposed approach is an effective and simple alternative to the KKT method, especially for problems with non-convex lower-level.

Keywords

Main Subjects


References
1. Milligan, M., Holttinen, H., Kiviluoma, J., Orths,
A., Lynch, M.A., and Soder, L. Market designs for
high levels of variable generation", In 2014 IEEE PES
General Meeting Conference & Exposition, pp. 1{5
(July 2014).
2. Wang, B. and Hobbs, B.F. A
exible ramping product:
Can it help real-time dispatch markets approach
860 Z. Kaheh et al./Scientia Iranica, Transactions E: Industrial Engineering 27 (2020) 846{861
the stochastic dispatch ideal?", Electric Power Systems
Research, 109, pp. 128{140 (2014).
3. Wang, B. and Hobbs, B.F. Flexiramp market design
for real-time operations: Can it approach the stochastic
optimization ideal?", In Power and Energy Society
General Meeting (PES), 2013 IEEE, pp. 1{5 (July
2013).
4. Wang, B. and Hobbs, B.F., Real-Time Markets for
Flexiramp: A Stochastic Unit Commitment-Based
Analysis, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems,
31(2), pp. 846-860 (2015).
5. Wang, B. and Hobbs, B.F. Real-time markets for

exiramp: A stochastic unit commitment-based analysis",
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 31(2), pp.
846{860 (2016).
6. California ISO. Folsom, CA, USA, Addition of
a new
exible ramping constraint in the real
time pre-dispatch and real time dispatch process",
Tech. Bulletin (Feb. 2011) [Online], Available at:
http://www.caiso.com/2b30/2b307b2a64380.pdf
7. Navid, N., Rosenwald, G., and Chatterjee, D., Ramp
Capability for Load Following in the MISO Markets,
Midwest Independent System Operator (2011).
8. Moiseeva, E., Hesamzadeh, M.R., and Biggar, D.R.
Exercise of market power on ramp rate in windintegrated
power systems", Power Systems, IEEE
Transactions on, 30(3), pp. 1614{1623 (2015).
9. Milligan, M., Frew, B., Zhou, E., and Arent, D.J. Advancing
system
exibility for high penetration renewable
integration (No. NREL/TP-6A20-64864)", NREL
(National Renewable Energy Laboratory) (2015).
10. Soares, T., Pinson, P., Jensen, T.V., and Morais, H.
Optimal o ering strategies for wind power in energy
and primary reserve markets", IEEE Transactions on
Sustainable Energy, 7(3), pp. 1036{1045 (2016).
11. Riaz, S., Chapman, A.C., and Verbic, G. Evaluation
of concentrated solar-thermal generation for provision
of power system
exibility", In Power Systems Computation
Conference (PSCC), 2016, pp. 1{7 (June 2016).
12. Wu, H., Shahidehpour, M., and Khodayar, M.E.
Hourly demand response in day-ahead scheduling
considering generating unit ramping cost", IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, 28(3), pp. 2446{2454
(2013).
13. Carrion, M., Arroyo, J.M., and Conejo, A.J. A bilevel
stochastic programming approach for retailer futures
market trading", Power Systems, IEEE Transactions
on, 24(3), pp. 1446{1456 (2009).
14. Haghighat, H. and Kennedy, S.W. A bilevel approach
to operational decision making of a distribution company
in competitive environments", Power Systems,
IEEE Transactions on, 27(4), pp. 1797{1807 (2012).
15. Shi, L., Luo, Y., and Tu, G.Y. Bidding strategy
of microgrid with consideration of uncertainty for
participating in power market", International Journal
of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 59, pp. 1{13
(2014).
16. Khojasteh, M. and Jadid, S. Decision-making
framework for supplying electricity from distributed
generation-owning retailers to price-sensitive customers",
Utilities Policy, 37, pp. 1{12 (2015).
17. Tohidi, Y., Hesamzadeh, M.R., Baldick, R., and
Biggar, D.R. Transmission network switching for
reducing market power cost in generation sector: A
Nash-equilibrium approach", Electric Power Systems
Research, 146, pp. 71{79 (2017).
18. Carrion, M., Arroyo, J.M., and Conejo, A.J. A bi
level stochastic programming approach for retailer
futures market trading", IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, 24, pp. 1446{1456 (2009).
19. Cheng, C.-B. Reverse auction with buyer-supplier
negotiation using bi-level distributed programming",
European Journal of Operational Research, 211(3), pp.
601{611 (2011).
20. Chen, Y., He, L., Li, J., Cheng, X., and Lu, H.
An inexact bi-level simulation-optimization model
for conjunctive regional renewable energy planning
and air pollution control for electric power generation
systems", Applied Energy, 183, pp. 969{983 (2016).
21. European Wind Energy Association, Support Schemes
for Renewable Energy. A Comparative Analysis of
Payment Mechanisms in the EU. Directorate-General
Energy and Transport (2002).
22. Cheng, C.-B. Reverse auction with buyer-supplier
negotiation using bi-level distributed programming",
European Journal of Operational Research, 211(3), pp.
601{611 (2011).
23. Pozo, D., Sauma, E., and Contreras, J. Basic theoretical
foundations and insights on bilevel models and their
applications to power systems", Annals of Operations
Research, 254(1-2), pp. 303{334 (2017).
24. Shih, H.S., Lai, Y.J., and Lee, E.S. Fuzzy approach
for multi-level programming problems", Computers &
Operations Research, 23(1), pp. 73{91 (1996).
25. Ungureanu, V. Taxonomy of strategic games with
information leaks and corruption of simultaneity", In
Pareto-Nash-Stackelberg Game and Control Theory,
pp. 255{273. Springer, Cham (2018).
26. Nie, P.Y., Chen, L.H., and Fukushima, M. Dynamic
programming approach to discrete time dynamic feedback
Stackelberg games with independent and dependent
followers", European Journal of Operational
Research, 169(1), pp. 310{328 (2006).
27. Simaan, M. and Cruz Jr, J.B. On the Stackelberg
strategy in nonzero-sum games", Journal of Optimization
Theory and Applications, 11(5), pp. 533{555
(1973).
28. Ben-Ayed, O. and Blair, C.E. Computational dif-
culties of bi level linear programming", Operations
Research, 38, pp. 556{560 (1990).
29. Gongxian, X. and Yang, L. Steady-state optimization
of biochemical systems by bi-level programming",
Computers & Chemical Engineering, 106, pp. 286{296
(2017).
Z. Kaheh et al./Scientia Iranica, Transactions E: Industrial Engineering 27 (2020) 846{861 861
30. Roghanian, E., Aryanezhad, M.B., and Sadjadi, S.J.
Integrating goal programming, Kuhn-Tucker conditions,
and penalty function approaches to solve linear
bi-level programming problems", Applied Mathematics
and Computation, 195(2), pp. 585{590 (2008).
31. Sakawa, M. and Matsui, T. Interactive random fuzzy
two-level programming through possibility-based probability
model", Information Sciences, 239, pp. 191{
200 (2013).
32. Hejazi, S.R., Memariani, A., Jahanshahloo, G., and
Sepehri, M.M. Linear bilevel programming solution
by genetic algorithm", Computers & Operations Research,
29(13), pp. 1913{1925 (2002).
33. Kuo, R.J. and Huang, C.C. Application of particle
swarm optimization algorithm for solving bi-level linear
programming problem", Computers & Mathematics
with Applications, 58(4), pp. 678{685 (2009).
34. Kuo, R.J. and Han, Y.S. A hybrid of genetic algorithm
and particle swarm optimization for solving bilevel
linear programming problem - A case study on
supply chain model", Applied Mathematical Modelling,
35(8), pp. 3905{3917 (2011).
35. Kato, K., Sakawa, M., Matsui, T., and Ohtsuka, H.
A computational method for obtaining Stackelberg
solutions to noncooperative two-level programming
problems through evolutionary multi-agent systems",
In Agent and Multi-Agent Systems: Technologies and
Applications, pp. 639{648, Springer Berlin Heidelberg
(2009).
36. Lai, Y.-J. Hierarchical optimization: A satisfactory
solution", Fuzzy Set and Systems, 77, pp. 321{335
(1996).
37. Soares, T., Pinson, P., Jensen, T.V., and Morais, H.,
Optimal O ering Strategies For Wind Power in Energy
and Primary Reserve Markets, IEEE Transactions on
Sustainable Energy, 7(3), pp. 1036-1045 (2016).
38. Bellman, R.E. and Zadeh, L.A. Decision-making in a
fuzzy environment", Management Science, 17(4), B-
141 (1970).
39. Saranwong, S. and Likasiri, C. Bi-level programming
model for solving distribution center problem: A case
study in Northern Thailand's sugarcane management",
Computers & Industrial Engineering, 103, pp. 26{39
(2017).
40. Shih, H.S., Lai, Y.J., and Lee, E.S. Fuzzy approach
for multi-level programming problems", Computers &
Operations Research, 23(1), pp. 73{91 (1996).