Hybrid Optimization in Prosumer-to-Grid Energy Management System for Pareto-Optimal Solution
Featured Application
Abstract
1. Introduction
- Development of a hybrid NN-MOGA framework for peer-to-grid optimization.
- Formulation of objective functions that minimize total cost and maximize customer satisfaction.
- Validation through convexity analysis and Karush–Kuhn–Tucker (KKT) conditions.
- Comparison of the Pareto front of the hybrid NN-MOGA against MOGA, MOPSO, and MOFA, demonstrating improved cost efficiency, customer satisfaction, hyper-volume (HV) convergence, diversity spread (DS), error analysis, and statistical analysis.
2. Related Work
2.1. Roles of Aggregator in Energy Market
- Access to markets and representation;
- Optimization and control action;
- Equilibrium of services;
- Financial settlement;
- Regulatory control and supervision.
2.2. Flow Chart of System Model
2.3. Flow Chart Implementation of Hybrid Optimization
2.4. Neural Network Model
2.5. Mathematical Model of Energy System
- Mathematical model of photovoltaic power generation: Photovoltaic energy production is influenced by various environmental parameters, including solar irradiance and surrounding temperature levels. The mathematical representation of the power output of photovoltaic modules is given as follows:where is the real power output of the solar cell, is the maximum power for standard test conditions, is the reference solar irradiance of 1000 , is the ambient temperature, is the solar irradiance, is the power temperature coefficient, and is the working temperature of the solar cell.
- Mathematical model of energy storage system: The energy storage system (ESS) is employed to retain surplus generation from various RES sources. The charging and discharging cycles of the battery are regulated by the energy management system to facilitate the optimization of the user’s objectives. The energy contained within the battery energy storage is expressed in Equation (3) [47,48,49]:where is the energy stored in the ESS at time (kWh). , and are the initial states of charge, charging power, and discharging power, respectively. and are the charging and discharging efficiencies. Both and are taken as 0.98. is the charging flag indicator, is a specific time instant within period , and is the total time under consideration.
- Mathematical model of cost of photovoltaics: The operation cost of solar PV is represented as [39]where is the unit maintenance cost of solar power generation, is the cost coefficient of solar power generation, and is the solar generation power.
- Mathematical model of cost function for energy storage systems: To calculate the cost of the energy storage system (ESS), we use Equation (5) [39,48]:where is the cost of the ESS at time (USD/kWh), is the coefficient cost of the ESS, is the energy stored in the ESS at time , is the input power to the ESS at time (kilowatt), is the rated capacity of ESS, and is the leakage loss coefficient of the battery ESS.
2.6. Multi-Objective Optimization
3. Simulation Results
3.1. System Parameter
- Case 1: This case represents hybrid optimization, which produced a uniform Pareto-optimal solution. Figure 3 shows the results of the simulation for the hybrid NN-MOGA.
- Training: R = 1.000, indicating a perfect fit between the predicted and actual values.
- Validation: R = 0.99644, suggesting that the model generalizes well to unseen data.
- Test: R = 0.87081, showing a slight decline, possibly due to limited test data or minor overfitting.
- Overall: R = 0.98569, confirming that the network maintained a high degree of accuracy across all datasets. These results indicate that the hybrid NN-MOGA model successfully captured the complex relationships in the optimization problem while maintaining high generalization performance. The NN training used early stopping when the minimum gradient was reached. Training was carried out every 5–10 min based on the optimization scheduler to update the system.
- The final gradient value was 6.2941 × 10−12 at epoch 7, indicating that the training process converged. The adaptive learning parameter (Mu) was reduced to 1 × 10−10 at epoch 7, suggesting that the network no longer requires large parameter updates, reinforcing the idea of convergence stability.
- Validation checks: The training stopped at epoch 7 with only two validation failures, meaning that overfitting was successfully prevented using an early stopping mechanism. This confirms that the hybrid NN-MOGA framework effectively trained the neural network with minimal risk of overfitting while maintaining stable convergence.
- The best validation performance was achieved at epoch 5, with an MSE of 0.0047565.
- Training MSE decreased steadily, while validation and test errors remained stable, indicating good generalization. The early stopping mechanism prevented excessive training, ensuring that the model did not overfit the training dataset. This suggests that the neural network in hybrid NN-MOGA strikes a balance between learning accuracy and generalization, making it well-suited for multi-objective optimization tasks.
- Case 2: This case involved MOGA optimization, which produced a single-point optimal solution. Figure 5 shows the results of the simulation.
- Case 3: Figure 6 shows the results of the simulation for MOPSO optimization, which produced a well-distributed Pareto-optimal solution.
- Case 4: Figure 7 shows the results of the simulation for MOFA optimization, which produced a scattered Pareto-optimal solution.
3.2. Hyper-Volume Convergence Analysis
3.3. Diversity Spread Analysis
3.4. Error Analysis
3.5. Knee-Point Analysis
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
References
- Gaggero, G.B.; Girdinio, P.; Marchese, M. Artificial intelligence and physics-based anomaly detection in the smart grid: A survey. IEEE Access 2025, 13, 23597–23606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reka, S.S.; Dragicevic, T.; Venugopal, P.; Ravi, V.; Rajagopal, M.K. Big data analytics and artificial intelligence aspects for privacy and security concerns for demand response modelling in smart grid: A futuristic approach. Heliyon 2024, 10, 750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Li, D.; Chiu, W.Y.; Sun, H.; Poor, H.V. Multiobjective optimization for demand side management program in smart grid. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2017, 14, 1482–1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, Q.; Cui, Z.; Cai, Y.; Su, Y.; Wang, B. Renewable-based microgrids’ energy management using smart deep learning techniques: Realistic digital twin case. Sol. Energy 2023, 250, 128–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Obi, C.E.; Kharatovi, L.; Sias, Q.A.; Gantassi, R.; Choi, Y. Minimizing Electricity Cost in Energy Trading Using Particle Swarm Optimization. In Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Communications and Information Sciences Conference, Jeju, Republic of Korea, 6–8 September 2023; pp. 496–497. Available online: https://www.dbpia.co.kr/Journal/articleDetail?nodeId=NODE11667374 (accessed on 20 November 2025).
- Zaini, F.A.; Sulaima, M.F.; Razak, I.A.W.A.; Zulkafli, N.I.; Mokhlis, H. A review on the applications of PSO-based algorithm in demand side management: Challenges and opportunities. IEEE Access 2023, 11, 53373–53400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, G.; Wang, Z.; Gao, W.; Cui, L.; Zhang, Q. Adaptive multi/many-objective transformation for constrained optimization. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst. 2024, 55, 721–734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leung, M.F.; Wang, J. A collaborative neurodynamic approach to multiobjective optimization. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 2018, 29, 5738–5748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmed, M.; Meegahapola, L.; Vahidnia, A.; Datta, M. Stability and Control Aspects of Microgrid Architectures–A Comprehensive Review. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 144730–144766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jain, D.; Saxena, D. Comprehensive review on control schemes and stability investigation of hybrid AC-DC microgrid. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2023, 218, 109182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jasim, A.M.; Jasim, B.H.; Flah, A.; Bolshev, V.; Mihet-Popa, L. A new optimized demand management system for smart grid-based residential buildings adopting renewable and storage energies. Energy Rep. 2023, 9, 4018–4035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Silva, B.; Khan, M.; Wijesinghe, R.; Wijenayake, U. Meta-heuristic optimization based cost efficient demand-side management for 771sustainable smart communities. Energy Build. 2024, 303, 113599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sarker, E.; Halder, P.; Seyedmahmoudian, M.; Jamei, E.; Horan, B.; Mekhilef, S.; Stojcevski, A. Progress on the demand side management in smart grid and optimization approaches. Int. J. Energy Res. 2021, 45, 36–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Said, D. A survey on information communication technologies in modern demand-side management for smart grids: Challenges, solutions, and opportunities. IEEE Eng. Manag. Rev. 2022, 51, 76–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rana, M.M.; Atef, M.; Sarkar, M.R.; Uddin, M.; Shafiullah, G.M. A Review on peak load shaving in microgrid—Potential benefits, challenges, and future trend. Energies 2022, 15, 2278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jani, A.; Karimi, H.; Jadid, S. Hybrid day-ahead and real-time energy trading of renewable-based multi-microgrids: A stochastic cooperative framework. Sustain. Energy Grids Netw. 2024, 40, 101516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amin, R.; Gantassi, R.; Ahmed, N.; Alshehri, A.H.; Alsubaei, F.S.; Frnda, J. A hybrid approach for adversarial attack detection based on sentiment analysis model using Machine learning. Eng. Sci. Technol. Int. J. 2024, 78558, 101829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cortez, V.; Rabelo, R.; Carvalho, A.; Floris, A.; Pilloni, V. On the Impact of Flexibility on Demand-Side Management: Understanding the Need for Consumer-Oriented Demand Response Programs. Int. J. Energy Res. 2024, 7882024, 8831617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fan, S.; Ai, Q.; Piao, L. Bargaining-based cooperative energy trading for distribution company and demand response. Appl. Energy 2018, 226, 469–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, L.; Dong, H.; Lin, J.; Zeng, M. Multi-objective optimal scheduling model with IGDT method of integrated energy system considering ladder-type carbon trading mechanism. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2022, 143, 108386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tajalli, S.Z.; Weckesser, T.; Bindner, H. A framework for assessing the participation of aggregated flexible loads in power markets. In Proceedings of the IEEE Power & Energy Society Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference (ISGT), Dubrovnik, Croatia, 14–17 October 2024; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2024; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Akkouch, R.; Menci, S.P.; Pavic, I. Congestion Management in European Electricity Systems Through Aggregators and Local Flexibility Markets: A Systematic Literature Review. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on the European Energy Market (EEM), Istanbul, Turkiye, 10–12 June 2024; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Singh, U.K. Regional Dimensions of Human Development in India and South Africa: Through Sustainable Development Goals; Springer Nature: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2024. [Google Scholar]
- Brown, A.D. Consumer-Oriented Distributed Energy Policy for Korea: Based on a Case Study of Victoria, Australia. Int. Reg. Res. 2024, 28, 23–54. [Google Scholar]
- Nishizawa, A.; Gibson, D.V. Technology-Based Regional Economic Development: Institutional Perspectives from the United States and Japan; Taylor & Francis: London, UK, 2024. [Google Scholar]
- García-Santacruz, C.; Gómez, P.J.; Carrasco, J.M.; Galván, E. Multi P2P energy trading market, integrating energy storage systems and used for optimal scheduling. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 64302–64315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thirunavukkarasu, G.S.; Seyedmahmoudian, M.; Jamei, E.; Horan, B.; Mekhilef, S.; Stojcevski, A. Role of optimization techniques in microgrid energy management systems—A review. Energy Strategy Rev. 2022, 43, 100899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kanakadhurga, D.; Prabaharan, N. Demand side management in microgrid: A critical review of key issues and recent trends. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 156, 111915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kharrich, M.; Mohammed, O.H.; Alshammari, N.; Akherraz, M. Multi-objective optimization and the effect of the economic factors on the design of the microgrid hybrid system. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 65, 102646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, M.; Sun, L.; Wang, J. Multi-objective optimization scheduling considering the operation performance of islanded microgrid. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 83405–83413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heydari, A.; Nezhad, M.M.; Keynia, F.; Fekih, A.; Shahsavari-Pour, N.; Garcia, D.A.; Piras, G. A combined multi-objective intelligent optimization approach considering techno-economic and reliability factors for hybrid-renewable microgrid systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2023, 383, 135249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ghiasi, M. Detailed study, multi-objective optimization, and design of an AC-DC smart microgrid with hybrid renewable energy resources. Energy 2019, 169, 496–507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Riou, M.; Dupriez-Robin, F.; Grondin, D.; Le Loup, C.; Benne, M.; Tran, Q.T. Multi-objective optimization of autonomous microgrids with reliability consideration. Energies 2021, 14, 4466. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, X.; Cao, W.; Wang, D.; Ding, M. A Multi-Objective optimization dispatch method for microgrid energy management considering the power loss of converters. Energies 2019, 12, 2160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haidar, A.M.; Fakhar, A.; Helwig, A. Sustainable energy planning for cost minimization of autonomous hybrid microgrid using combined multi-objective optimization algorithm. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020, 62, 102391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shivam, K.; Tzou, J.C.; Wu, S.C. A multi-objective predictive energy management strategy for residential grid-connected PV-battery hybrid systems based on machine learning technique. Energy Convers. Manag. 2021, 237, 114103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chithra, S.; Arunachalaperumal, C.; Rajagopal, R.; Meenalochini, P. Hybrid optimization for energy management in smart grids using Golden Jackal algorithm and deep convolutional neural networks. Electr. Eng. 2025, 107, 8201–8215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Huang, Y.; Cai, Q.; Cai, Y.; Liu, C.; Huang, S. Modeling and Prediction of Demand Response Based on Deep Quantum Neural Networks. Int. J. High Speed Electron. Syst. 2025, 34, 2540332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sobhani, S.O.; Sheykhha, S.; Madlener, R. An integrated two-level demand-side management game applied to smart energy hubs with storage. Energy 2020, 206, 118017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Panda, S.; Mohanty, S.; Rout, P.K.; Sahu, B.K.; Bajaj, M.; Zawbaa, H.M.; Kamel, S. Residential Demand Side Management model, optimization and future perspective: A review. Energy Rep. 2022, 8, 3727–3766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cabot, C.; Villavicencio, M. The demand-side flexibility in liberalised power market: A review of current market design and objectives. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2024, 201, 114643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baccino, F.; Grillo, S.; Massucco, S.; Mauri, G.; Mora, P.; Silvestro, F. An aggregator for demand side management at domestic level including PEVs. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Electric Vehicle Conference (IEVC), Florence, Italy, 17–19 December 2014; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Sias, Q.A.; Gantassi, R.; Choi, Y. Multivariate bidirectional gate recurrent unit for improving accuracy of energy prediction. ICT Express 2024, 11, 80–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balakumar, P.; Vinopraba, T.; Chandrasekaran, K. Deep learning based real time Demand Side Management controller for smart building integrated with renewable energy and Energy Storage System. J. Energy Storage 2023, 58, 106412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Obi, C.E.; Gantassi, R.; Choi, Y. Application of artificial intelligence in minimizing voltage deviation using neural network predictive controller. In Model and Data Engineering; Ordonez, C., Sperlì, G., Masciari, E., Bellatreche, L., Eds.; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2025; pp. 158–172. [Google Scholar]
- Pournazarian, B.; Seyedalipour, S.S.; Lehtonen, M.; Taheri, S.; Pouresmaeil, E. Virtual impedances optimization to enhance microgrid small-signal stability and reactive power sharing. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 139691–139705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Obi, C.E.; Gantassi, R.; Choi, Y. Artificial intelligence driven digital twin for dynamic pricing model in hybrid optimization. IEEE Access 2025, 13, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, D.; Peng, Y.; Sun, J. Dual-Stage Optimization Scheduling Model for a Grid-Connected Renewable Energy System with Hybrid Energy Storage. Energies 2024, 17, 737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giannelos, S.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, T.; Strbac, G. Multi-Objective Optimization for Pareto Frontier Sensitivity Analysis in Power Systems. Sustainability 2024, 16, 5854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]









| Criterion | Value |
|---|---|
| Number of prosumers | 4 |
| (USD) | 0.15 |
| (USD) | 0.10 |
| Time (hours) | 24 |
| Pareto fraction | 0.35 |
| Constraint tolerance | 1 × 10−3 |
| Crossover fraction | 0.80 |
| Function tolerance | 1 × 10−3 |
| Maximum generations | 100 |
| Maximum stall generation | 100 |
| Population size | 200 |
| Training dataset | 4 × 24 |
| Simulation time (seconds) | 44.56 |
| Optimization Method | MAE Total Cost (USD) | MAE Customer Satisfaction (USD) | RMSE Total Cost (USD) | RMSE Customer Satisfaction (USD) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hybrid NN-MOGA | 2.7713 | 0.42825 | 2.8408 | 0.45393 |
| MOGA | 45.786 | 81.471 | 49.971 | 81.519 |
| MOPSO | 12.928 | 4.9714 | 14.541 | 6.4825 |
| MOFA | 25.627 | 4.4464 | 27.275 | 4.8207 |
| Features | Hybrid NN-MOGA | MOGA | MOPSO | MOFA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pareto front spread | Uniformly distributed (excellent) | Single point (poor spread) | Well distributed (good) | Wide distribution (diverse but scattered) |
| Convergence | Excellent | Poor | Strong (near Pareto- optimal front) | Moderate (broad exploration) |
| Diversity | Excellent | Very low | High | High but scattered |
| Accuracy | Best | Likely suboptimal | High | Moderate |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Obi, C.E.; Gantassi, R.; Choi, Y. Hybrid Optimization in Prosumer-to-Grid Energy Management System for Pareto-Optimal Solution. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 12719. https://doi.org/10.3390/app152312719
Obi CE, Gantassi R, Choi Y. Hybrid Optimization in Prosumer-to-Grid Energy Management System for Pareto-Optimal Solution. Applied Sciences. 2025; 15(23):12719. https://doi.org/10.3390/app152312719
Chicago/Turabian StyleObi, Celestine Emeka, Rahma Gantassi, and Yonghoon Choi. 2025. "Hybrid Optimization in Prosumer-to-Grid Energy Management System for Pareto-Optimal Solution" Applied Sciences 15, no. 23: 12719. https://doi.org/10.3390/app152312719
APA StyleObi, C. E., Gantassi, R., & Choi, Y. (2025). Hybrid Optimization in Prosumer-to-Grid Energy Management System for Pareto-Optimal Solution. Applied Sciences, 15(23), 12719. https://doi.org/10.3390/app152312719

