ArticleScientific reports2026
On the smart coordination of flexibility scheduling in multi-carrier integrated energy systems.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- On the smart coordination of flexibility scheduling in multi-carrier integrated energy systems.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Coordinating the interactions among flexibility assets in multi-carrier integrated energy systems (MIES) can lead to a cost-efficient energy transition. However, the proliferation of flexibility assets and their growing participation in active demand response increases the complexity of coordinating these interactions. This paper investigates several approaches to model the coordination of flexibility scheduling in MIES with many autonomous flexibility providers. We propose runtime model coupling as an alternative modeling paradigm to overcome the limitations of monolithic centralized co-optimization. Specifically, we introduced two model coupling approaches-a distributed price-response and a decentralized market auction approach-to address practical challenges such as preserving the autonomy and privacy of flexibility providers while ensuring scalability. We conduct a quantitative benchmark of these approaches against co-optimization across varying problem sizes, complexities, and computing infrastructures. This benchmark provides new empirical insights into the trade-offs between optimality, autonomy, and scalability that have so far remained unquantified in the energy system literature. We show that model coupling offers a method to balance optimality and realism (autonomy and privacy) while delivering substantial scalability gains. The proposed model coupling approaches are formalized as open-source software with several practical applications: modelers can experiment with different flexibility modeling approaches and choose the one that best matches their modeling objectives and constraints; flexibility providers can couple their models to simulate interactions between their systems to make informed operational decisions without disclosing any confidential information.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.