Skip to main content

Table 6 Evaluation results: (a) Flexibility Trinity, (b) Multienergy Node, (c) Support Vector Data Description, (d) OpenTUMFlex, (e) FlexOffer; Subsections: A Variety of devices, B Technical criteria, C Time related criteria, D Implementation & Comprehensibility, E Aggregation; \({\bar{z}}_{m,1}\): Arithmetic mean of respective sub category of modeling approach m; \({\bar{z}}_{m,2}\): Arithmetic mean of respective main category of modeling approach m; \({\bar{z}}_{m,3}\): Arithmetic mean of all criteria of modeling approach m

From: Choosing the right model for unified flexibility modeling

(a) A B C D E (b) A B C D E
  2 2 1 2 1   2 2 2 1 1
  2 2 0 0 0   2 2 0 0 0
  2 2 0 0 1   2 2 0 0 1
  2 2 0 2 2   2 1 0 0 2
  1 2   2 1
\({\bar{z}}_{a,1}\) 2.00 1.80 0.25 1.20 1.00 \({\bar{z}}_{b,1}\) 2.00 1.80 0.50 0.40 1.00
\({\bar{z}}_{a,2}\) 1.38 1.11 \({\bar{z}}_{b,2}\) 1.46 0.67
\({\bar{z}}_{a,3}\) 1.27 \({\bar{z}}_{b,3}\) 1.14
(c) A B C D E (d) A B C D E
  2 2 1 1 0   2 0 0 2 2
  2 2 0 0 1   2 0 0 2 2
  2 2 0 0 1   2 2 2 2 1
  0 1 0 1 2   2 2 2 1 2
  1 0   2 2
\({\bar{z}}_{c,1}\) 1.50 1.60 0.25 0.40 1.00 \({\bar{z}}_{d,1}\) 2.00 1.20 1.00 1.80 1.75
\({\bar{z}}_{c,2}\) 1.15 0.67 \({\bar{z}}_{d,2}\) 1.38 1.78
\({\bar{z}}_{c,3}\) 0.95 \({\bar{z}}_{d,3}\) 1.54
(e) A B C D E       
  0 1 0 2 2       
  2 0 0 0 2       
  1 2 2 0 1       
  0 2 2 1 2       
  2 1       
\(\bar{z}_{e,1}\) 0.75 1.40 1.00 0.80 1.75       
\(\bar{z}_{e,2}\) 1.08 1.22       
\(\bar{z}_{e,3}\) 1.14