CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 1Electric Vehicles and InfrastructureOptimal Power Flow DistributionSmart Grid Energy Management

Grid-aware Scheduling and Control of Electric Vehicle Charging Stations for Dispatching Active Distribution Networks. Part-I: Day-ahead and Numerical Validation

Open access
Gupta, Rahul K., Fahmy, Sherif, Chevron, Max, Vasapollo, Riccardo, Figini, Enea, Paolone, Mario·2024·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2404.12863arXiv 2404.12863
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This paper proposes a grid-aware scheduling and control framework for Electric Vehicle Charging Stations (EVCSs) for dispatching the operation of an active power distribution network. The framework consists of two stages. In the first stage, we determine an optimal day-ahead power schedule at the grid connection point (GCP), referred to as the dispatch plan. Then, in the second stage, a real-time model predictive control is proposed to track the day-ahead dispatch plan using flexibility from EVCSs. The dispatch plan accounts for the uncertainties of vehicles connected to the EVCS along with other uncontrollable power injections, by day-ahead predicted scenarios. We propose using a Gaussian-Mixture-Model (GMM) for the forecasting of EVCS demand using the historical dataset on arrival, departure times, EV battery capacity, State-of-Charge (SoC) targets, etc. The framework ensures that the grid is operated within its voltage and branches power-flow operational bounds, modeled by a linearized optimal power-flow model, maintaining the tractability of the problem formulation. The scheme is numerically and experimentally validated on a real-life distribution network at the EPFL connected to two EVCSs, two batteries, three photovoltaic plants, and multiple heterogeneous loads. The day-ahead and real-time stages are described in Part-I and Part-II papers respectively.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This paper proposes a two-stage grid-aware framework for dispatching active distribution networks by using EV charging station flexibility alongside BESS, with Part-I covering the day-ahead scheduling stage and numerical validation. It shows that including EVCS flexibility substantially improves tracking of a day-ahead dispatch plan while preserving EV charging targets.

Key findings

  • On Day-1, adding BESS+EVCS control reduced UEE−, UEE+, MAE, and MPP by 77%, 95%, 96%, and 77%, respectively, compared with no control.
  • On Day-2, the same metrics were reduced by 75%, 90%, 92%, and 71%, respectively.
  • The conclusion reports that EVCS flexibility reduced net aggregated energy error by 75–95%, maximum power error by 92–96%, and maximum power at the GCP by 71–77%.
  • EV charging sessions were not significantly affected: the difference between SOC target and SOC at departure had a similar distribution with and without control, and BESS+EVCS control gave the best tracking-error spread.

Methods

  • The day-ahead stage computes a 24-hour active-power dispatch plan at the grid connection point with 5-minute resolution, using scenario-based stochastic optimization and a linearized optimal power flow model for voltage, branch-current, transformer, and power-factor constraints.
  • EVCS demand is forecast with parametric Gaussian Mixture Models using historical features such as charging sessions, arrival/departure times, initial/target SOCs, battery capacities, and power limits; PV uses a physics-based model with SoDa GHI and temperature forecasts, and uncontrollable demand uses a multivariate-Gaussian scenario method.
  • Numerical validation is performed on a real EPFL distribution network with two EVCSs, two BESSs, three PV plants, and heterogeneous loads; the paper reports day-ahead dispatch results for a cloudy working day and a clear-sky weekend day.

Limitations

  • The paper states that Part-I presents only the day-ahead stage and its numerical validation; the real-time stage and full experimental validation are deferred to Part-II.
  • The paper states that V2G action is excluded, EVCS reactive power is uncontrollable and null, and the grid model uses a single-phase equivalent assuming a transposed and balanced configuration.
  • The paper states that the iterative LOPF correction achieves a local optimum; it also notes that the day-ahead optimization is linear and solved with a linprog solver.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2404.12863

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 27 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    In the numerical experiments, the net aggregated energy error was reduced by 75-95%.

    “In the numerical experiments, it was seen that the net aggregated energy error was reduced by 75-95 %, the maximum power error was reduced by 92-96 %, and the maximum power seen at the GCP was reduced by 71-77 %.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The reactive power from EVCS is uncontrollable and null.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The reactive power from PV plants is zero in the day-ahead stage.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The BESS losses are modeled by virtual resistance by adding an extra line as done for EVCS.
  • Findingreasoning

    For day-1, the UEE obtained with BESS+EVCS control performs best concerning the spread of the tracking error during the day.

    “Fig. 7 shows that the UEE obtained with the BESS+EVCS control performs the best concerning the spread of the tracking error during the day.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The reactive power from EVCS is uncontrollable and null.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The reactive power from PV plants is zero in the day-ahead stage.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The BESS losses are modeled by virtual resistance by adding an extra line as done for EVCS.
  • Findingown data

    In the numerical experiments, the maximum power seen at the GCP was reduced by 71-77%.

    “In the numerical experiments, it was seen that the net aggregated energy error was reduced by 75-95 %, the maximum power error was reduced by 92-96 %, and the maximum power seen at the GCP was reduced by 71-77 %.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The reactive power from EVCS is uncontrollable and null.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The reactive power from PV plants is zero in the day-ahead stage.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The BESS losses are modeled by virtual resistance by adding an extra line as done for EVCS.
  • Findingown data

    The realizations of aggregated load and PV are within the day-ahead forecasts.

    “It shows that the realizations are within the day-ahead forecasts, so they can be reliably used for day-ahead dispatching.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    In the numerical experiments, the maximum power error was reduced by 92-96%.

    “In the numerical experiments, it was seen that the net aggregated energy error was reduced by 75-95 %, the maximum power error was reduced by 92-96 %, and the maximum power seen at the GCP was reduced by 71-77 %.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The reactive power from EVCS is uncontrollable and null.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The reactive power from PV plants is zero in the day-ahead stage.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The BESS losses are modeled by virtual resistance by adding an extra line as done for EVCS.
  • May combine two claims. 12
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 9
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For day-2, with BESS+EVCS control, UEE-, UEE+, MAE, and MPP were reduced by 75%, 90%, 92%, and 71% respectively compared to without control.

    “Specifically, UEE-, UEE+, MAE and MPP reduced by 75 %, 90 %, 92 %, and 71 % respectively.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The reactive power from EVCS is uncontrollable and null.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The reactive power from PV plants is zero in the day-ahead stage.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The BESS losses are modeled by virtual resistance by adding an extra line as done for EVCS.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    On day-2, large PV generation resulted in power exports, especially in the middle of the day.

    “As can be seen, the day corresponds to large PV generation (Fig. 13) resulting in power exports, especially in the middle of the day.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The flexibility offered by EVCS reduces the peak power and overall power variation seen at the GCP.

    “It also reduces the peak power and overall power variation seen at the GCP.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The reactive power from EVCS is uncontrollable and null.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The reactive power from PV plants is zero in the day-ahead stage.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The BESS losses are modeled by virtual resistance by adding an extra line as done for EVCS.

  • May combine two claims. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    In day-1, all scenario profiles at the GCP merge into a single profile, the optimized dispatch plan, due to power regulation by BESS1/BESS2 and curtailment on EV charging in EVCS1/EVCS2.

    “Comparing Fig. 6a and 6b, it can be observed that all the scenario profiles at the GCP merge into a single profile, which is the optimized dispatch plan.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The reactive power from EVCS is uncontrollable and null.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The reactive power from PV plants is zero in the day-ahead stage.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The BESS losses are modeled by virtual resistance by adding an extra line as done for EVCS.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In day-1, the SOC of BESS1 and BESS2 remained within the imposed SOC limits.

    “Fig. 6c (lower panel) shows the SOC of two BESS, and it can be observed that they are within the imposed SOC limits.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The BESS losses are modeled by virtual resistance by adding an extra line as done for EVCS.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    For day-1, with BESS+EVCS control, UEE-, UEE+, MAE, and MPP were reduced by 77%, 95%, 96%, and 77% respectively compared to without control.

    “Specifically, UEE-, UEE+, MAE and MPP reduced by 77 %, 95 %, 96 %, and 77 % respectively.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The reactive power from EVCS is uncontrollable and null.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The reactive power from PV plants is zero in the day-ahead stage.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The BESS losses are modeled by virtual resistance by adding an extra line as done for EVCS.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    The GMM model is cross-validated using K-fold cross-validation to avoid over-fitting.

    “Each time, the model is cross-validated using the so-called K-fold cross-validation scheme [28] to avoid over-fitting.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [28]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductnone given

    The presented schemes are numerically and experimentally validated on a real-scale distribution system interfacing multiple EVCSs, demonstrating the real-life implementability of the proposed framework.

    “The presented schemes are numerically and experimentally validated on a real-scale distribution system interfacing multiple EVCSs, demonstrating the reallife implement-ability of the proposed framework.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    The parametric nature of the forecasting tool is easy to train with any new historical data, and for learning the conditional probability distributions with respect to different variables.

    “The parametric nature of the forecasting tool is easy to train with any new historical data, and for learning the conditional probability distributions with respect to different variables.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Previous dispatching schemes [13], [14] consider EVCS demand as uncontrollable and are likely to fail in the absence of large battery energy storage systems (BESSs).

    “However, the above dispatching schemes [13], [14] consider EVCS demand as uncontrollable and are likely to fail in the absence of large battery energy storage systems (BESSs).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [13]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [14]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationnone given

    The RT-MPC utilizes flexible resources (EVCS and BESS) in real-time to compensate for power mismatches at the ADN's GCP between the optimal day-ahead DP and actual realization during the day of operation.

    “The RT-MPC utilizes flexible resources (EVCS and BESS) in real-time to compensate for power mismatches at the ADN's GCP between the optimal day-ahead DP and actual realization during the day of operation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductnone given

    In this work, the possibility of V2G action is excluded in line with the experimental setup.

    “In this work, we exclude the possibility of V2G action in line with the experimental setup.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    The day-ahead optimization problem is linear and can be efficiently solved by a linprog solver.

    “It can be noted that the day-ahead OP is linear and can be efficiently solved by a linprog solver.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    DSOs might get penalized for unreliable balancing and dispatching of their networks.

    “where the DSOs might get penalized for unreliable balancing and dispatching of their networks [9].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [9]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    The day-ahead and intraday formulations account for and demonstrate advantages in using the power and energy flexibility from the EVCSs.

    “Compared to [13], [14], the day-ahead and intraday formulations account for and demonstrate advantages in using the power and energy flexibility from the EVCSs.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [13]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [14]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    EVCSs increase reserve requirements of transmission systems.

    “as well as increasing reserve requirements of transmission systems [6], [7].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [6]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [7]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    DSOs may have to bear financial responsibility concerning power imbalances.

    “distribution system operators (DSOs) may have to bear financial responsibility concerning power imbalances [8]- [10]”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [8]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [9]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [10]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    The framework ensures that the grid is operated within its voltage and branches power-flow operational bounds, modeled by a linearized optimal power-flow model, maintaining the tractability of the problem formulation.

    “The framework ensures that the grid is operated within its voltage and branches power-flow operational bounds, modeled by a linearized optimal power-flow model, maintaining the tractability of the problem formulation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Modeling converter losses by adding virtual resistances in the power-flow equations allows the formulation to be linear and avoids extra variables for battery charge and discharge powers.

    “This approximation allows the formulation to be linear and avoids the use of extra variables for battery charge and discharge powers.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [14]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [36]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

19 of 19

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The stochastic processes for EVCS, demand, and PV are independent.

    “Assuming that the stochastic processes for EVCS, demand and PV are independent, we can account for all the possible uncertainties by considering all the combinations of scenarios, i.e., N sc = N ev × N load × N pv makes the scenario set Ω = {1, . . ., N sc }).”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The grid configuration is transposed and balanced.

    “We use a single-phase equivalent of the power-flow equations as we assume to have a transposed and balanced grid configuration, although the same can be easily extended to three-phase as shown in [21].”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The reactive power from EVCS is uncontrollable and null.

    “In our control, the reactive power from the EVCS is uncontrollable and null (i.e., q evcs t,l,i,ω = 0, ∀t, l, i, ω).”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The reactive power from PV plants is zero in the day-ahead stage.

    “The reactive power from PV plants are considered to be zero in the dayahead stage.”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The BESS losses are modeled by virtual resistance by adding an extra line as done for EVCS.

    “The BESS losses are also modeled by virtual resistance by adding an extra line as done for EVCS.”
5 of 5

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • EVCS1 and EVCS2 charging levels are reversed

    Minor

    The validation text calls EVCS1 level-2 and EVCS2 level-3, reversing the levels assigned to those stations earlier in the same section and in Table III.

  • BESS sampling time conflicts with day-ahead resolution

    Minor

    The day-ahead dispatch plan has a five-minute time resolution, but its BESS state-of-charge constraint defines the sampling time as 30 seconds.

  • Figure 10 caption assigns Day-2 results to day 1

    Minor

    The Day-2 results section identifies Fig. 10 as showing that day's dispatch computation, but the figure caption calls it day 1.

3 of 3

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

5 of the 34 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Power Quality Application Guide, "Voltage disturbances," Standard EN, vol. 50160, 2004.
  2. IEEE Std 1159-2009, "Ieee recommended practice for monitoring elec- tric power quality," (Revision of IEEE Std 1159-1995), Tech. Rep., June 2009.
  3. AEMO, "Review of the black system south australia report -system event of 28 september 2016," Tech. Rep., 2017.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Gupta, R. K., Fahmy, S., Chevron, M., Vasapollo, R., Figini, E., & Paolone, M.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2024
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2404.12863
arXiv
2404.12863
OpenAlex
W4395022542
Cited by
1
References
34
Citations by year
2025: 1
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
European Commission (HORIZON2020, 775970, 646039)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Electric Vehicles and Infrastructure
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Optimal Power Flow Distribution
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Smart Grid Energy Management
Keywords
electric vehicle charging stations, active distribution networks, day-ahead scheduling, model predictive control, EV charging demand forecasting, Gaussian mixture model, grid connection point, photovoltaic power plants

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-28.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-28.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review