Current Research

• This research distinguishes itself by explicitly incorporating consumer heterogeneity into the game-theoretic model. Unlike many existing studies that treat consumers as a uniform group, my research examines the strategic interactions between electricity providers and diverse consumer segments, addressing a significant gap in the literature.

• The methodology employed in this research is a game-theoretic analysis, specifically utilizing a Stackelberg game framework. The research involves conducting simulations to evaluate the performance of dynamic pricing strategies across various scenarios, comparing them to traditional fixed-price schemes.

Figure: Provider Profit Comparison illustrates the variation in provider profits over 24 hours, comparing dynamic and fixed pricing models. The x-axis represents the hours of the day (1 to 24), while the y-axis shows the provider profit in USD. The "Provider Profit (Dynamic)" line likely exhibits fluctuations throughout the day, reflecting changes in profit based on varying demand and pricing strategies under dynamic pricing. In contrast, the "Provider Profit (Fixed)" line remains relatively stable, indicating consistent profits under a fixed pricing model. The graph highlights the potential benefits and risks of dynamic pricing for providers, as it can lead to higher profits during peak demand periods but may also result in lower profits during off-peak times, whereas fixed pricing offers steady but potentially lower overall profits. This comparison is useful for understanding the financial implications of different pricing strategies on provider profitability.

Figure: Consumer Surplus Comparison depicts the variation in consumer surplus in USD over 24 hours, comparing dynamic and fixed pricing models. The x-axis represents the hours of the day (1 to 24), while the y-axis shows the consumer surplus in USD, ranging from -50 to 250. The "Consumer Surplus (Dynamic)" line exhibits significant fluctuations throughout the day, indicating that consumer surplus varies considerably under dynamic pricing, with peaks suggesting higher benefits during certain hours and troughs indicating lower or negative surplus during others. In contrast, the "Consumer Surplus (Fixed)" line remains relatively stable, reflecting a consistent consumer surplus under a fixed pricing model. The graph highlights the trade-offs between the two pricing strategies, showing that while dynamic pricing can offer higher consumer surplus at specific times, it also poses risks of lower or negative surplus during other periods, whereas fixed pricing provides a steady but potentially lower surplus throughout the day.

Figure: Social Welfare Comparison illustrates the variation in social welfare in USD over 24 hours, comparing dynamic and fixed pricing models. The x-axis represents the hours of the day (1 to 24), while the y-axis shows the social welfare in USD, ranging from 0 to 300. The "Social Welfare (Dynamic)" line exhibits fluctuations throughout the day, indicating that social welfare varies under dynamic pricing, with peaks suggesting higher overall benefits during certain hours and troughs indicating lower welfare during others. In contrast, the "Social Welfare (Fixed)" line remains relatively stable, reflecting consistent social welfare under a fixed pricing model. The graph highlights the trade-offs between the two pricing strategies, showing that while dynamic pricing can lead to higher social welfare at specific times, it may also result in lower welfare during other periods, whereas fixed pricing provides a steady but potentially lower overall welfare throughout the day. This comparison is useful for understanding the broader economic impacts of different pricing strategies on social welfare.