Consensus Reaching with Heterogeneous User Preferences

  • Hélène Le CadreEmail author
  • Enrique Rivero Puente
  • Hanspeter Höschle
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering book series (LNICST, volume 277)


In this paper, we consider consumers and prosumers who interact on a platform. Consumers buy energy to the platform to maximize their usage benefit while minimizing the cost paid to the platform. Prosumers, who have the possibility to generate energy, self-consume part of it to maximize their usage benefit and sell the rest to the platform to maximize their revenue. Product differentiation is introduced and consumers can specify preferences regarding locality, RES-based generation, and matchings with the prosumers. The consumers and prosumers’ problems being coupled through a matching probability, we provide analytical characterizations of the resulting Nash equilibrium. Assuming supply-shortages occur, we reformulate the platform problem as a consensus problem that we solve using Alternating Direction Method of Multipliers (ADMM), enabling minimal information exchanges between the nodes. On top of the platform, a trust-based mechanism combining exploitation of nodes with good reputation and exploration of new nodes, is implemented to determine the miner node which validates the transactions. A case study is provided to analyze the impact of preferences and miner selection dynamic process.


Game theory Two-sided market Local community ADMM 


  1. 1.
    Boyd, S., Parikh, N., Chu, E., Peleato, B., Eckstein, J.: Distributed optimization and statistical learning via the alternating direction method of multipliers. Found. Trends Mach. Learn. 3(1), 1–122 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fagnani, F., Zampieri, S.: Randomized consensus algorithms over large scale networks. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 26(4), 634–649 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fang, Z., Huang, L., Wierman, A.: Prices and subsidies in the sharing economy. In: 26th International Conference on World Wide Web - WWW 2017, pp. 53–62. ACM Press (2017).
  4. 4.
    Höschle, H., Le Cadre, H., Smeers, Y., Papavasiliou, A., Belmans, R.: An ADMM-based method for computing risk-averse equilibrium in capacity markets. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 33(5), 4819–4830 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lamport, L., Shostak, R., Pease, M.: The Byzantine generals problem. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 4(3), 382–401 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Le Cadre, H.: On the efficiency of local electricity markets under decentralized and centralized designs: a multi-leader Stackelberg game analysis. Cent. Eur. J. Oper. Res. (CEJOR) 14, 1–32 (2018). In pressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Le Cadre, H., Mezghani, I., Papavasiliou, A.: A game-theoretic analysis of transmission-distribution system operator coordination. Eur. J. Oper. Res. (EJOR) 274(1), 317–339 (2019)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Moret, F., Pinson, P.: Energy collectives: a community and fairness based approach to future electricity markets. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. (2018, in press).
  9. 9.
    Munsing, E., Mather, J., Moura, S.: Bolckchains for decentralized optimization of energy resources in microgrid networks. In: International Conference on Control Technology and Applications, IEEE (2017).
  10. 10.
    Jiang, A.X., Procaccia, A.D., Qian, Y., Shah, N., Tambe, M.: Defender (mis)coordination in security games via ADMM. In: IJCAI 2013, pp. 220–226. ACM Press (2018)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Szabo, N.: Smart contracts: building blocks for digital markets. Extropy 16 (1996)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tushar, W., Yuen, C., Mohsenian-Rad, H., Saha, T., Poor, V., Wood, K.L.: Transforming energy networks via peer to peer energy trading: potential of game theoretic approaches. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 247(935), 529–551 (2018)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vangulick, D., Cornélusse, B., Ernst, D.: Blockchain for peer-to-peer energy exchanges: design and recommendations. In: PSCC Conference, Dublin, Ireland (2018)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang, Y., Saad, W., Han, Z., Poor, V., Başar, B.: A game-theoretic approach to energy trading in the smart grid. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 5(935), 1439–1450 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhang, C., Wu, J., Long, C., Cheng, M.: Review of existing peer-to-peer energy trading projects. Energy Proc. 105, 2563–2568 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ICST Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hélène Le Cadre
    • 1
    Email author
  • Enrique Rivero Puente
    • 1
  • Hanspeter Höschle
    • 1
  1. 1.VITO/EnergyVilleGenkBelgium

Personalised recommendations