Expected Fair Allocation in Farsighted Network Formation

I consider cooperation situations where players have network relations. Networks evolve according to a stationary transition probability matrix and at each moment in time players receive payoffs from a stationary allocation rule. Players discount the future by a common factor. The pair formed by an allocation rule and a transition probability matrix is called expected fair if for every link in the network both participants gain, marginally, and in discounted, expected terms, the same from it; and it is called a pairwise network formation procedure if the probability that a link is created (or eliminated) is positive if the discounted, expected gains to its two participants are positive too. The main result is the existence, for the discount factor small enough, of an expected fair and pairwise network formation procedure where the allocation rule is component balanced, meaning it distributes the total value of any maximal connected subnetwork among its participants. This existence result holds for all discount factors when the pairwise network formation procedure is restricted. I finally provide some comparison with previous models of farsighted network formation.

Gain Scheduling Control of an Islanded Microgrid Voltage

The aim of this research study has been to design a gain scheduling (GS) digital controller in order to control the voltage of an islanded microgrid in the presence of fast varying loads (FVLs), and to compare it to a robust controller. The inverter which feeds the microgrid is connected to it through an inductance-capacitor-inductance (LCL) filter. The oscillatory and nonlinear behaviour of the plant is analyzed in the whole operating zone. Afterwards, the design of the controllers which contain two loops in cascade are described. The first loop concerns the current control, while the second is linked to the voltage regulation. Two controllers, one defined as Robust and another one as GS controller, are designed for the two loops, emphasizing in their robustness and their ability to damp the oscillatory plant behaviour. To finish, some simulations are carried out to study and compare the two kinds of controllers in different operating points. The results show that both controllers damp the oscillatory behaviour of the plant in closed loop (CL), and that the GS controller ensures a better rejection of current disturbances from FVLs.