• Journal of Electrical Engineering and Technology
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.1069-1078
• /
• 2018

Demand response (DR) programs give opportunity to consumers to manage their electricity bills. Besides, distribution system operator (DSO) is interested in using DR programs to obtain technical and economic benefits for distribution network. Since small consumers have difficulties to individually take part in the electricity market, an entity named demand response provider (DRP) has been recently defined to aggregate the DR of small consumers. However, implementing DR programs face challenges to fairly allocate benefits and payments between DRP and DSO. This paper presents a procedure for modeling the interaction between DRP and DSO based on a bilevel programming model. Both DSO and DRP behave from their own viewpoint with different objective functions. On the one hand, DRP bids the potential of DR programs, which are load shifting and load curtailment, to maximize its expected profit and on the other hand, DSO purchases electric power from either the electricity market or DRP to supply its consumers by minimizing its overall cost. In the proposed bilevel programming approach, the upper level problem represents the DRP decisions, while the lower level problem represents the DSO behavior. The obtained bilevel programming problem (BPP) is converted into a single level optimizing problem using its Karush-Kuhn-Tucker (KKT) optimality conditions. Furthermore, point estimate method (PEM) is employed to model the uncertainties of the power demands and the electricity market prices. The efficiency of the presented model is verified through the case studies and analysis of the obtained results.

• 대한예방의학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 1994.02b
• /
• pp.270-284
• /
• 1994

Interim analyses of randomized trials enable investigators to make more efficient use of limited research resources and to satisfy ethical requirements that a regimen be discontinued as soon as it has been established to have an inferior efficacy/toxicity profile. Unfortunately. the integrity and credibility of these trials can be compromised if inappropriate procedures are used in monitoring interim data. 'In this paper we discuss how group sequential designs provide useful guidelines that enable one to satisfy the valid objectives of interim monitoring while avoiding undesirable consequences, and we consider how flexible one can be in the way such designs are implemented. We also provide motivation for the role of data-monitoring committees in preserving study integrity and credibility in either government- or industry-sponsored trials. In our view. these committees should have multidisciplinary representation and membership limited to individuals free of apparent significant conflict of interest, and ideally should be the only individuals to whom the data analysis center provides interim results on relative efficacy of treatment regimens. Finally. we discuss some important practical issues such as estimation following group sequential testing, anal ysis of secondary outcomes after using a group sequential design applied to a primary outcome, early stopping of negative trials. and the role of administrative analyses.