4.7 Article

Benefit distribution in shared private charging pile projects based on modified Shapley value

Journal

ENERGY
Volume 263, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2022.125720

Keywords

Private charging pile sharing; Benefit distribution; Modified shapley method; Cloud gravity center method

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Private charging pile sharing is an innovative business model that addresses the shortage of publicly accessible charging infrastructure in large cities. However, the lack of an effective benefit distribution scheme hinders the implementation and promotion of such projects. By using an improved Shapley value model, fair distribution of benefits can be ensured in private charging pile sharing projects.
Private charging pile sharing is an innovative business model alleviating the shortage of well-developed publicly accessible charging infrastructure, which has been evident in large cities. However, the lack of effective benefit distribution scheme impedes the implementation and promotion of private charging pile sharing projects. To address this deficiency, an improved Shapley value model is developed. First, risk, input and service quality are identified as the key factors to improve the deficiencies in the allocation of benefits based on the contribution. Second, the modified Shapley value method is established based on the cloud gravity center, which to determine the correction value of each distribution factor. This is combined with the modified Shapley value to ensure fair distribution of benefits arising from the private charging pile sharing. An example is given to illustrate the applicability of the proposed model. The results show that the improved Shapley value is significantly enhances the multi-party cooperation and can be used as an effective tool for fair and reasonable allocation of private charging pile sharing project.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available