Premium Power Value-Added Service Product Decision-Making Method Based on Multi-Index Two-Sided Matching

With the further reform and development of the electricity retail market in China, the premium power value-added service (PPVS) product is becoming increasingly demanded by high-tech customers. However, the problem of PPVS demand-level matching has not been well studied. How to build an optimal matching and decision-making model which can improve both customers’ and electricity retail companies’ satisfaction degree is an urgent issue. Thus, this paper proposes a decision-making method for PPVS products with multi-index expectation based on two-sided matching. Firstly, a multi-index evaluation system is established from the perspective of customers and electricity retail companies. Secondly, the loss and gain matrices of customers and electricity retail companies are constructed, considering the difference between the expected level (EL) and the actual level (AL) of the evaluation indices. Thirdly, perceived utility (PU) of both customers and electricity retail companies are described with the introduction of elation function and disappointment function, due to different perceptions concerning the matching results under both sides’ evaluation indices. Fourthly, a multi-objective two-sided matching optimization model that aims to maximize the PU of both sides is developed. Finally, an empirical analysis is conducted on three large high-tech electronic-based customers in an industrial park in western Guangdong for demonstrating the effectiveness and rationality of the proposed method.

[1]  Eklas Hossain,et al.  Analysis and Mitigation of Power Quality Issues in Distributed Generation Systems Using Custom Power Devices , 2018, IEEE Access.

[2]  Zeshui Xu,et al.  Intuitionistic fuzzy two-sided matching model and its application to personnel-position matching problems , 2020, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[3]  Yuan Gao,et al.  Two-sided matching decision making with multi-granular hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets and incomplete criteria weight information , 2020, Expert Syst. Appl..

[4]  Yejun Xu,et al.  Deriving the priority weights from incomplete hesitant fuzzy preference relations in group decision making , 2016, Knowl. Based Syst..

[5]  Zhichao Lin,et al.  A Risk Evaluation Method to Voltage Sag Considering the Process Immunity Time of Industry Consumer , 2019, 2019 IEEE 3rd International Electrical and Energy Conference (CIEEC).

[6]  Bin Li,et al.  A novel two-sided matching decision method for technological knowledge supplier and demander considering the network collaboration effect , 2018, Soft Comput..

[7]  Xinyue Kou,et al.  Consistency improvement for fuzzy preference relations with self-confidence: An application in two-sided matching decision making , 2020, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[8]  David Manlove,et al.  The stable marriage problem with master preference lists , 2008, Discret. Appl. Math..

[9]  Wang Xi,et al.  Research on the strategy of voltage sag comprehensive management based on supply and demand coordination , 2017, 2017 2nd International Conference on Power and Renewable Energy (ICPRE).

[10]  James W. Boudreau,et al.  A marriage matching mechanism menagerie , 2017, Oper. Res. Lett..

[11]  Zhen Zhang,et al.  Consensus reaching for MAGDM with multi-granular hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets: a minimum adjustment-based approach , 2019, Annals of Operations Research.

[12]  S. Grant,et al.  Ausi Expected Utility: An Anticipated Utility Theory of Relative Disappointment Aversion , 1994 .

[13]  Luhao Wang,et al.  Integrated scheduling of energy supply and demand in microgrids under uncertainty: A robust multi-objective optimization approach , 2017 .

[14]  L. S. Shapley,et al.  College Admissions and the Stability of Marriage , 2013, Am. Math. Mon..

[15]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  Distributed Linguistic Representations in Decision Making: Taxonomy, Key Elements and Applications, and Challenges in Data Science and Explainable Artificial Intelligence , 2020, Inf. Fusion.

[16]  Jared L. Cohon,et al.  Multiobjective programming and planning , 2004 .

[17]  Krassimir T. Atanassov,et al.  Intuitionistic fuzzy sets , 1986 .

[18]  Francisco Herrera,et al.  A Consensus Model for Group Decision Making With Incomplete Fuzzy Preference Relations , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems.

[19]  Zhen Zhang,et al.  Stable two-sided matching decision making with incomplete fuzzy preference relations: A disappointment theory based approach , 2019, Appl. Soft Comput..

[20]  Zhen Zhang,et al.  Managing Multigranular Unbalanced Hesitant Fuzzy Linguistic Information in Multiattribute Large-Scale Group Decision Making: A Linguistic Distribution-Based Approach , 2020, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems.

[21]  Xianyong Xiao,et al.  The optimal selection of investment scheme for premium power considering customer perception of utility , 2016, 2016 17th International Conference on Harmonics and Quality of Power (ICHQP).

[22]  Jovica V Milanović,et al.  Risk-Based Assessment of Financial Losses Due to Voltage Sag , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery.

[23]  Zixuan Zheng,et al.  Perceived Utility of Premium Power by High-tech Manufacturers , 2020, Journal of Modern Power Systems and Clean Energy.

[24]  Yong Xu,et al.  An Inductive Hybrid UPQC for Power Quality Management in Premium-Power-Supply-Required Applications , 2020, IEEE Access.

[25]  Hai Lu,et al.  Multi-objective optimal planning of the stand-alone microgrid system based on different benefit subjects , 2016 .

[26]  Mohammad Ghiasi,et al.  Technical and economic evaluation of power quality performance using FACTS devices considering renewable generations , 2019, Renewable Energy Focus.

[27]  Faruk Gul A Theory of Disappointment Aversion , 1991 .

[28]  Yang Li,et al.  Incorporating energy storage and user experience in isolated microgrid dispatch using a multi-objective model , 2019, IET Renewable Power Generation.

[29]  Qing Wang,et al.  A New Method to Identify the Investment Value of Premium Power Supply of Sensitive Users , 2020, 2020 19th International Conference on Harmonics and Quality of Power (ICHQP).

[30]  Gabriela Glanzmann FACTS: flexible alternating current transmission systems , 2005 .

[31]  Xi Chen,et al.  Matching demanders and suppliers in knowledge service: A method based on fuzzy axiomatic design , 2016, Inf. Sci..

[32]  David E. Bell,et al.  Disappointment in Decision Making Under Uncertainty , 1985, Oper. Res..

[33]  Ying Wang,et al.  Investment Strategy and Multi–Objective Optimization Scheme for Premium Power under the Background of the Opening of Electric Retail Side , 2018 .

[34]  Elke U. Weber,et al.  Correcting expected utility for comparisons between alternative outcomes: A unified parameterization of regret and disappointment , 2008 .

[35]  J.V. Milanovic,et al.  Probabilistic assessment of equipment trips due to voltage sags , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery.

[36]  Chao Zhang,et al.  Multigranulation rough set model in hesitant fuzzy information systems and its application in person-job fit , 2017, Int. J. Mach. Learn. Cybern..

[37]  Yan Zhang,et al.  Global Minimization of Financial Losses Due to Voltage Sags With FACTS Based Devices , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery.