This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid.

This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2023.3327689

A Capacity-Based Regulation Method for

Coordinating Electric Vehicle Charging Flows in
Coupled Distribution and Transportation Networks
Networks
Ke Li, Graduate Student Member, IEEE, Chengcheng Shao, Member, IEEE, Mohammad
Shahidehpour, Life Fellow, IEEE and Xifan Wang, Life Fellow, IEEE

Abstract—The proliferation of electric vehicles (EVs) is P-EVRM Price-based EV regulation model

bringing additional challenges to power distribution network
R&C Routing and charging
(PDN) operations. Traditional regulation methods incentivize EVs
to charge at expected places via price signals, which cannot IO Inverse optimization
guarantee a secure PDN operation due to uncertain responsiveness BP&C Branch price and cut
of EVs to charging prices. This paper explores the use of available
EV charging station (EVCS) capacities as signals and proposes a O-D Origin-destination
regulation method to coordinate EV charging flows in coupled KKT Karush-Kuhn-Tucker
power and transportation networks. First, the proposed bi-level C-EVRM Capacity-based EV regulation model
model optimizes the available charging capacities and schedules
the least-cost power generation at the upper level, while assigning DG Distributed generation
the traffic flows by user equilibrium and navigating the EV DRG Distributed renewable generation
charging at the lower level. The adverse impact of EV charging MILP Mixed-integer linear programming
behaviors on PDN operations is eliminated by the proposed model.
Second, a branch price and cut-based decomposition algorithm is RMP Reduced master problem
proposed to tackle the computational intractability and SP Subproblem
infeasibility brought about by the capacity regulation. Third, the
inverse optimization technique is exploited to yield an enhanced
PDI Parameter deviation index
regulation strategy that alleviates the impact of system A. Indices, Superscript, Subscript and Sets
adjustments on EV users. Finally, case studies are carried out on
a practical network, which demonstrate the merits of the proposed m, n Index for nodes in traffic network
capacity-based method over the traditional price-based method. a Index for arcs in traffic network
Index Terms—Power-transportation coordination, capacity- rs Index for O-D pairs
based regulation, electric vehicle charging station, branch price
and cut algorithm, user equilibrium. w Index for EV paths
i , j ,k Index for buses in power network
NOMENCLATURE ev Superscript for electric vehicle
evcs Superscript for electric vehicle charging station
The main parameters and variables used in this paper are
listed here for quick reference, while the rest are defined after T Superscript for matrix transposition
the first appearance in the main body. dg Superscript for distributed generation
drg Superscript for distributed renewable generation
A. Abbreviations
pl Superscript for power line
EV Electric vehicle
L Superscript for traditional load
EVCS Electric vehicle charging station
 ,  Set of arcs and nodes in traffic network
PDN Power distribution network
,  Set of buses and power lines in power network
UTN Urban transportation network
 , rs Set of O-D pairs and paths for O-D pair rs
CPTN Coupled power-transportation network
TAP Traffic assignment problem B. Variables and Functions
UE User equilibrium f Traffic flow rate of paths
ev
DLMP Distribution locational marginal price p EV charging load
pevcs Available EVCS capacity
This work is supported by the Science and Technology Program of State τ Dual multiplier of EVCS capacity limit
Grid Corporation of China under Grant 5400-202099508A-0-0-00. x, y Traffic flow rate on arcs and nodes
K. Li, C. Shao, and X. Wang are with the School of Electrical
Engineering, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an 710049, China (e-mail: t road Travel time on arcs
ke.li1997@stu.xjtu.edu.cn, c.c.shao22@msn.cn, xfwang@xjtu.edu.cn ).
t char Charging time at EVCSs
M. Shahidehpour is with the Robert W. Galvin Center for Electricity
Innovation, Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago (e-mail: ms@iit.edu). e EV charging energy at EVCSs

Authorized licensed use limited to: SHANGHAI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on November 05,2023 at 09:47:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2023.3327689

δ Binary variable for path-arc incidence approximately 80 TWh of electricity in 2019, resulting in
γ Binary variable for path-charging node incidence savings of approximately 128 million tons of CO2 equivalent
emissions when compared to an equivalent fleet of fuel vehicles.
ξ Travel cost of O-D pair
The increasing EVs signify charging demand in EV charging
η EV Path costs stations (EVCS). Accordingly, the number of public fast
b EV stored battery energy at nodes chargers almost doubled from 141,000 in 2018 to 263,000 in
pdg , q dg Active/reactive power output of DG units 2019 [4]. On the one hand, the widespread adoption of EVCSs
necessitates power distribution network (PDN) upgrades,
pdrg , q drg Active/reactive power output of DRG units
particularly the aging and overburdened feeders [5]. One the
s drg DRG curtailment other hand, large-scale disordered EV charging, especially fast
p pl , q pl Active/reactive power flow on lines and ultra-fast ones, can result in a series of PDN operational
ev problems, including voltage drops, increased network losses,
q Reactive EV load at buses
harmonic pollutions, three-phase imbalances, reduced
v Bus voltage transformer lives, etc. [6]. Considering the mobile nature of
ε Slack variable EVs, PDN and urban transportation network (UTN) are
spatially coupled by charging loads. A growing body of work
C. Parameters and Constants
has been devoted to regulate EV charging flows in the coupled
λ Charging price at EVCSs PDN and UTN (CPTN) for improving the grid operation
evcs
Pmax Maximum EVCS capacity efficiency [7].
The essence of EV regulation is to guide the EVs charging at
c Road capacity anticipated EVCSs by applying certain signals so that the grid
F Travel demand of O-D pairs operation can be ameliorated. EV charging navigation consists
Z Matrix for bus-node incidence of determining the optimal charging location and planning the
Λ Matrix for path-O-D pair incidence travel route to reach that location [8]. The latter involves
addressing the traffic assignment problem (TAP), which aims
 Factor from travel time to monetary cost to assign a set of trips to UTNs based on the predetermined
D EV battery energy consumption on arcs criteria. Considering users’ rationality in route selections, TAP
M Very big positive constant follows the user equilibrium (UE) [9], in which individual
φ Anxiety level of EV battery energy participants seek the route with minimum time or cost.
Considering the mutuel interaction between PDN and UTN, a
B0 , Bmax Initial/maximum stored energy of EVs
network equilibrium model is proposed in [10] where EV flows
ιevcs Availability of EVCSs are assigned by UE and power generation is scheduled by the
C dg Generation cost of DG units optimal power flow model. Accordingly, a best-response
α Punishment cost for DRG curtailments decomposition algorithm is proposed to obtain the equilibrium
drg state. As an improvement, a generalized user equilibrium model
Pmax Available power of DRG units
is applied in [11] to capture the impact of PDN operation on
P L , QL Traditional load at buses EVCS charging capacities and UTN traffic flow distributions.
Γ Matrix for bus-line incidence These studies have generated a good basis for supporting the
R, X Power line resistance/reactance coordinated operation of CPTN.
The above-discussed works adopted the distribution
V0 Reference voltage magnitude locational marginal price (DLMP) as charging price to
 Penalty factor for slackness coordinate EV charging schedules and ensure the least-cost grid
operations. Apart from charging prices, road tolls are major
price signals for managing EV flows [12]. An optimal CPTN
I. INTRODUCTION model is proposed in [13] which imposes congestion tolls on
roads for minimizing the social cost. Considering the CPTN
A S a significant contributor to air pollution and climate
change, the transportation sector is responsible for around a
operator’s perspective, the charging prices and road tolls are
coordinated [14], [15]. In line with it, [16] adopts the marginal
quarter of global CO2 emissions from fuel combustion, which
cost pricing paradigm for devising a collaborative road toll and
makes it the second-largest emitting sector after the power
charging pricing, where DLMP is the charging price and the
sector [1]. The implementation of improving battery technology
marginal road latency is the road toll. The collaborative pricing
and the increasing accessibility of refueling infrastructures have
model is transformed into a variational inequality program in
enticed the transportation electrification to gain additional
[17] and solved by a prediction-correction algorithm.
momentum for reducing the carbon footprint [2]. The global
Those papers explore a first-best condition where a
transition to electric vehicles (EVs) will not only help mitigate
centralized agency has the full authority over both UTNs and
environmental concerns, but also reduce the fossil fuel
PDNs, with the aim of maximizing the social welfare. A
dependence and improve the energy supply security [3]. After
second-best pricing is investigated in [18], where PDN and
a decade of dramatic growth, the global EV stock hit the 10
UTN authorities manage the grid operation separately. The
million market in 2020, representing a 43% increase over the
abovementioned papers endeavor to coordinate EV flows by
previous year [2]. The global EV stock consumed
imposing extra tariffs on users. Alternatively, some works

Authorized licensed use limited to: SHANGHAI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on November 05,2023 at 09:47:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2023.3327689
remunerate monetary subsidies to users for shifting charging
demands to designated times or locations [19], [20]. The
subsidies are gathered from tax payments, and daily parking,
transit and electricity usage fees [21]. Numerous regulation
approaches have been proposed for coordinating EV flows in
CPTN. These regulation approaches, though chiefly different
from each other, which are categorized as either centralized or
decentralized [22], can be broadly classified as tariff-based,
subsidy-based or hybrid model [23]-[24], depending on the fee-
payer’s perspective. They are collectively named price-based
EV regulation model (P-EVRM).
The disadvantage of P-EVRM is two-fold. From the PDN’s
viewpoint, the price-based paradigms are unreliable. Because
they are built on the underlying assumption that EV users could
be fully controlled by price signals, thereby ensuring secure and
economic grid operations. However, this is bluntly unrealistic
since the designated charging could bring non-negligible
inconvenience to EV users, such as longer travel time and
access at less convenient areas, while convenience is the
priority for EV owners [25]. Especially, it is difficult to shift
on-route fast charging demands in spatial scale through the
traditional P-EVRM, to which timing is rigid while price is less
concerned. Moreover, the pricing strategy, which would
substantially affect the regulation effect, is hard to design due
to the heterogeneous nature of EV charging behavior. In fact,
grid-connected EVCSs are not necessarily able to operate at
maximum capacity due to power line congestions. Unregulated
or partially-regulated EV charging behaviors could impose
significant challenges to the secure and economic operation of
PDN. From a user’s viewpoint, tariff-based approaches impose
extra charges on EVs, which could be too high to be acceptable,
so the expected social optimum operation state (i.e., the power
generation dispatching and EV charging are coordinately
optimized by a centralized operator for minimizing the overall
network operation cost) can hardly be achieved. The pricing
could be unfair because users have to accept different tariff rates
due to their location in the network [19]. Similarly, subsidy-
based methods rely on external funding which could be too
heavy to be collected. It is an urgent issue to tailor a more
effective EV regulation method that can guarantee the secure
and economic grid operation while alleviating the impacts on
users.
In practice, when making routing and charging (R&C)
decisions, apart from traffic conditions and EVCS geographic
locations, which directly affect the travel time cost, EV users
are primarily concerned with available EVCS charging capacity
for avoiding long waiting time [26]. To the best of authors’
knowledge, the charging capacity of EVCSs has received
inadequate attention in the literature and the impact of network
regulation on EV users is seldom discussed. To mitigate the
research gaps, this paper explores the use of available EVCS
charging capacity as a signal, and proposes a capacity-based
regulation method to coordinate EV flows in CPTN. The
proposed method not only fully utilizes user’s spontaneity of
congestion-aversion, but also provides explicit boundaries for
PDN operation and deterministically ensures the secure and
economic grid operation. The inverse optimization (IO) is a
technique that calculates model parameters for a given set of
optimization decision variables [27]. It has been explored in the
CPTN pricing [28] for reducing extra user charges and is
Authorized licensed use limited to: SHANGHAI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on November 05,2023 at 09:47:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
proved to be effective. In light of it, this work proposes an IO-
based method to alleviate the adverse impact of the system-
level regulation on EVs while ensuring the secure network
operation.
First, the conceptual framework is presented, which
highlights the merit and necessity of the capacity-based method
over the traditional price-based one. Second, the bi-level EV
regulation model is established, in which the PDN operator
optimizes EVCSs’ available capacity and schedules power
generation at the upper level, and then EVs’ R&C is assigned
under the UE paradigm at the lower level. Third, a branch price
and cut (BP&C)-based decomposition algorithm is proposed to
tackle the intractability and infeasibility. Fourth, IO is applied
to ameliorate the EV regulation model, which reduces the
regulation impact on users. Finally, cased studies are carried out
to verify and visualize the effectiveness and merits of the
proposed methods. The contribution of this paper is trifold:
1) A capacity-based regulation method is proposed, which
optimizes EVCSs’ available charging capacity to coordinate
EV flows in CPTN. Compared to the traditional price-based
method, the proposed solution is immunized against the
uncontrolled EV charging behavior and can guarantee the
secure grid operation. The method also makes it possible to
exploit EVCS’s capacities as flexible resources to comply with
CPTN operation constraints. The case studies based on a real-
world urban network prove that the proposed solution
outperforms the traditional method in deterministic and
stochastic scenarios.
2) An improved branch price and cut-based decomposition
algorithm is tailored to tackle the potential infeasibility and
computational intractability. Different from the traditional
BP&C method, the proposed cutting planes are added to
enhance the subproblems, which can effectively tackle the
infeasibility brought by the adjustment of EVCSs’ available
capacities.
3) A parameter change index is proposed to estimate the
adverse impact of the system-level regulation on EV users. An
inverse optimization-based regulation method is designed to
alleviate this impact while maintaining the grid operation
performance. It also offers an approach to include all feasible
regulation schemes.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. Section II
presents the conceptual framework. Section III establishes the
bi-level capacity-based regulation model. Section IV designs
the solution algorithm and IO-based regulation method.
Sections V and VI demonstrate the simulation results and
conclusions, respectively.
II. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
A. Price-Based EV Regulation Model (P-EVRM)
As self-interested entities, EVs would apply the UE principle
to prioritize the R&C options with the lowest cost. However,
the decision-making process and the resulting EVCS load
distribution might not necessarily correspond to a feasible and
optimum power generation scheduling. Consider a simple UTN
with one O-D pair and two paths, as depicted in Fig. 1.
Each path is equipped with 1 EVCS. The maximum capacity
of both EVCSs is 600 kWh for one operation hour. The
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2023.3327689
charging capacity at EVCS #2 is supposed to be no superior to
400 kWh for complying with the temporal PDN operation
constraints. The traffic flow rates on Paths #1 and #2 are
denoted by f1 and f 2 , respectively. The energy charged at
EVCS is assumed to be 50 kWh for simplicity, which will be
accurately tracked via EV R&C constraints in Section III. The
EV charging demands at EVCS #1 and #2 are stated as
p1ev  50 f1 and p2ev  50 f 2 , respectively. The path costs c1
and c2 consist of traveling time and charging cost. For brevity,
the former is represented by a linear function to simulate the
congestion effect on roads. The latter is estimated by a fixed
charging price   0.1 . By applying the UE condition [9]
c1  10  2 f1  c2  17  f 2 and traffic conservation equation
F  f1  f 2  20 . The traffic is assigned as f1  9 and
f 2  11 , where p1ev  450 kWh and p2ev  550 kWh. This
exceeds the available charging capacity of EVCS #2, i.e., 400
kWh for one hour operation, and would violate the grid
operation constraints.
Fig. 1. Schematic of EV user equilibrium
The core of the price-based regulation method is to
incentivize EVs charging at expected EVCSs by price signals.
Temporally or spatially different tariffs/subsidies are adopted to
compensate EVs for acquiring their charging flexibility and
reshaping the charging load distribution. Thus, in the P-EVRM,
charging prices at EVCS #1 and #2, denoted as 1 and 2 ,
respectively, are different. The goal in this example is to shift
150 kWh EV load from EVCS #2 to #1 for securing the PDN
operation. This can be achieved by imposing 1  0.1 and
2  0.28 , as shown in Fig. 2.
Fig. 2. Schematic of price-based EV regulation method
Ideally, the P-EVRM method is effective in coordinating the
grid operation. However, it is not robust to the uncontrolled EV
charging behavior. If some EVs are indifferent to charging
prices, which is often the case for on-road fast charging, the P-
EVRM would no longer apply and the PDN operation could be
Authorized licensed use limited to: SHANGHAI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on November 05,2023 at 09:47:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
risked. The worst scenario occurs when no EV responds to the
charging price, as the example in Fig. 1. This issue, which is
overlooked in existing works, has motivated us to propose a
novel regulation method which can guarantee a secure PDN
operation.
B. Capacity-Based EV Regulation Model (C-EVRM)
Under P-EVRM, the PDN operator can optimize the
available EVCS capacity p evcs , which should not exceed the
evcs
maximum capacity Pmax . A lower charging capacity could
result in a higher congestion and longer waiting time in EVCSs,
which would influence EV R&C choices and charging demand
distribution. The proposed C-EVRM is schematized in Fig. 3.
The available capacity of EVCS #2 is limited to 400 kWh due
to the PDN operation constraints. The path cost consists of
travel time cost, charging cost and waiting cost  , which is the
dual multiplier associated with the available charging capacity
limit of TAP. When the charging demand reaches the designated
charging capacity of EVCS,  would be non-negative which
would naturally guide the EV charging at other EVCSs. In this
example, 1  0 and  2  9 . The traffic is assigned as f1  12
and f 2  8 , where the charging load p1ev  600 kWh and
p2ev  400 kWh. The grid operation limit is satisfied.
Fig. 3. Schematic of capacity-based EV regulation method
The available EVCS capacity can be regulated by the
network operator since EVCSs are directly connected to PDNs.
Moreover, the growing EV charging demand in the
transportation electrification should be favorably
accommodated by the variable distributed renewable
generation (DRG) instead of the controllable fuel-fired
generation. Only in this way can the carbon emission be
essentially reduced. Hence, it is eligible and necessary for the
PDN operator to reduce the available capacity of some EVCSs
below the rated level in certain time slots and areas especially
when the DRG output is low, for ensuring the network security,
e.g. avoiding power line overloading. For EVs, the idle
charging facilities are unavailable due to power network issues
and waiting for them would cost more time than switching to
other stations. As rational individuals, EVs would optimize
their R&C choices for minimizing the path cost and
spontaneously avoid charging at congested EVCSs.
Compared to the traditional P-EVRM, the advantage of C-
EVRM is two-fold. From the network’s perspective, the latter
is more reliable to the PDN operator. It is immunized against
the uncontrolled EV charging behavior because the adjusted
charging capacities are optimized by the PDN operator and
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2023.3327689

bound to comply with the grid operation constraints. The incidence. Considering the road congestion, t road is estimated
optimized EVCS charging capacity would provide an explicit by the BPR function [29]:
grid operation boundary and deterministically guarantee the 4
secure PDN operation. In contrast, charging prices in P-EVRM t
road
 x   t a0 1  0.15 xa ca    (2) 
    a
rely consistently on precise travel demand predictions and EVs’
responsiveness to price signals, which might deviate from the where t 0  [ta0 ]a is the free travel time on a road and
optimal solutions. In such cases, economic and secure grid c  [ca ]a is the road capacity. The charging time is related to
operations could not be maintained. From EVs’ perspective, it e and rated power of charging pile P pile  [ Pmpile ] m :
is practical to apply available EVCS capacity as signal as it fully t char  e   ew,m Pmpile  (3)
utilizes EVs’ spontaneity for congestion-aversion and time- m , wrs
saving, the principle of which is consistent with the UE concept. The optimized R&C choices constitute the path set. The traffic
No extra user charge is applied in C-EVRM, which can flows of path w in O-D pair rs should satisfy the travel demand:
essentially benefit the EV users.
ΛT f  F (4)
III. CAPACITY-BASED EV REGULATION MODEL where Λ is a |  |  |  | matrix: if w rs , w, rs  1 ; else,
This section analyses essential factors that could influence w , rs  0 . The arc flows, node flows, and path flows are linked:
the EV traffic equilibrium. Accordingly, the capacity-based EV x  δf (5)
regulation approach is proposed and the bi-level regulation y  γf (6)
model is established.
The traffic tends to reach an equilibrium, representing a UE
A. EV Regulation Analyses state (7), when no EV can gain higher benefits by changing its
TAP aims at mapping out EV flows on a transportation path unilaterally:
network to specific paths and EVCSs for a given travel demand. 0| |1  f   η  Λξ   0| |1 (7)
The UTN is represented by a directed graph     ,   ,
where variable ξ  [ rs ]rs denotes the travel cost of rs.
where  and  denote the set for nodes and arcs, indexed by
Variable η  [η1T , η2T  ηrs
T T
]rs with ηrs  [ w ] w rs denotes
m and a, respectively. The EVCSs at UTN are supplied by a
the path cost. Here, w  rs , if f w  0 ,  w   rs ; otherwise,
radial PDN     ,   , where  and  represent the set for
f w  0 ,  w   rs .
buses and lines, respectively. The traffic flow at arcs and nodes
The traffic assignment model for EVs is formulated by (1)-
are denoted by x  [ xa ]a and y  [ ym ]m , respectively. ev
(7) where EV charging load p  [ pmev ]m is formulated as:
The traffic demand is described by traffic flow rates of origin-
ev
destination (O-D) pairs, denoted by F  [ Frs ]rs . Due to the p  ef (8)
connectivity of UTN, each O-D pair can have multiple paths To coordinate EV flows, i.e., regulate R&C choices, we
which share the same origin and destination and are combined should change the path costs. Corresponding to the three terms
by different nodes and arcs. The traffic flow rate of path w in in (1), three kinds of regulation methods (RM) are designed as
O-D pair rs is denoted by f  [ f1T , f 2T  f rsT ]Trs with follows:
f rs  [ f w ] wrs . rs is the path set for rs. Set  includes the RM A: Apply road toll to change the first term t
road
.
paths of all O-D pairs. RM B: Apply plug-in fee to change the second term t char .
Due to the limited availability of roads and charging RM C: Alter charging price λ to change the third term eλ .
resources, EVs are mutually constrained by the same UTN and The three RMs belong to P-EVRM. Considering the PDN
charging network. EVs are assumed to be rational and have perspective that intends to minimize the PDN operation cost,
access to the real-time network information, based on which EV charging strategies can be coordinated by properly
each EV would choose the path with the minimum cost. In a adjusting road tolls, plug-in fees and charging prices. However,
traditional UE, an EV path cost consists of travelling time cost as illustrated in Section II, PDN operators do not perceive RMs
road
t , charging time cost t char , and electricity cost for charging: A-C as reliable alternatives. Because in reality not all EVCSs
are able to operate at maximum capacity due to grid operation
η    δT t road  x   γ T t char  e    e T λ (1) limits and not all users would respond to those price signals, so
where  is a scalar parameter to transform the time to monetary the EV load would not be regulated as expected and grid
operation constraints may be violated. This has motivated us to
cost. The EV charging energy is denoted by variable
explore a more effective and convenient regulation approach
e  [e1T , e2T  ers
T T
]rs , ers  [em, w ]m , wrs . The EV
that can guarantee secure PDN operations.
charging price at EVCSs is denoted by λ  [m ]m . Variable In practice, EV loads should be commensurate with the
δ  [δ1T , δ2T  δrsT ]Trs with δrs  [ a, w ]a , wrs denotes the available EVCS charging capacities, denoted by
path-arc incidence: if EV at path w passes road a,  w, a  1 ; else, pevcs  [ pievcs ]i .
 w, a  0 . Similarly, variable γ  [γ1T , γ 2T γ rsT ]Trs with
γ rs  [ m, w ]m , wrs represents the path-charging node 
0|  |1  τ  Z T pevcs  p
ev
0 |  |1 (9)

Authorized licensed use limited to: SHANGHAI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on November 05,2023 at 09:47:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2023.3327689

where Z  [ Zi ,m ]i ,m is a |  |  |  | matrix for bus-node  mo ,rs  1, if m  r

incidence. Variable τ  [ m ]m is the dual multiplier of 
[ o   d ]m,rs :  md ,rs  1, if m  s (12)
EVCS capacity constraint for the TAP. Specifically, when
 o   d  0, else.
EVCS has reached its capacity, EVs should wait for the next  m,rs m, rs
available charging service or resort to those available at other
and Δ is a |  |  |  | matrix:
EVCSs. (9) states that if pmev  Zi , m pievcs ,  m  0 ; if
pmev < Zi , m pievcs ,  m  0 . To consider limited charging 1, m is the starting node of a

capacities, the waiting cost τ is added to the path cost, where [m,a ]m , a  1, m is the ending node of a (13)
τ is zero if the EVCS has not reached its capacity limit. The 0, else.

path cost is reformulated as:
The battery charge e is related to the available battery energy
η    δ T t road  x   γ T t char  e    e T λ  γ T τ (10) along the road b  [b1T , b2T  brsT ]Trs , brs  [bm, w ]m , wrs ,
(m, n)   :
(2)-(10) constitutes the Karush-Kuhn-Tucker (KKT) conditions
of the EVCS capacity-constrained TAP where τ and η are the  M (1T|| 1  δa )  χ a  M (1T|| 1  δa ) (14)
ev
dual-multiplier of p  Z T pevcs and ΛT f  F , respectively. bm  bn  1| Da  em  χ a (15)
The waiting cost τ at EVCSs plays a similar role of the dual rs |1

multiplier associated with the road capacity constraint in where D  [ Da ]a denotes the battery energy consumption
Nesterov’s model, which is interpreted as the delay that users on the road. χ  [  w, a ]a ,w is the auxiliary variable. M is a
would experience if using a congested road [30]. very big positive constant. b cannot be below the anxiety level
The impact of EVCSs’ charging capacity on the path cost φ  [ rs ]rs ,  (m, n)=a   :
naturally offers the fourth RM (i.e., C-EVRM) for PDN: bn  Da   M (1 | |1  δa )  Λφ (16)
RM D: Adjust the EVCSs’ available charging capacity.
The initial stored energy of EVs is given as B0  [ B0, rs ]rs :
Adjusting pevcs would naturally affect τ and EVs’ charging
choice as well as the traffic equilibrium, where τ serves as the bH o = 1|  |1 B0T (17)
signal to guide EV charging. From an EV user’s viewpoint, it is EVs are assumed to be fully charged at each refueling as users
natural to choose the path/route with the minimum cost based would naturally tend to reduce the refueling frequency; so e
on road conditions and EVCS capacity information, so the C-
and γ are uniquely determined by:
EVRM is effective to regulate the EV charging in reality [30].
In this proposed C-EVRM, pevcs is optimized by the PDN  T
γ  1|  |1 Bmax 
ΛT  b  e  1|  |1 Bmax
T
ΛT (18)
operator to ensure a secure grid operation (i.e., PDN operation
where  represents the element-wise matrix multiplication.
limits will not be violated). In C-EVRM, no extra user charge
Bmax  [ Brs ,max ]rs denotes the maximum stored energy of
is applied and the charging price λ is set identical at different
EV battery. EVs can only be charged at EVCS nodes:
EVCSs, thus not affecting the EV charging choices and system
operation results. It can be set by calculating the system-wide 0|  || |  e  ι evcs 1|T |1 (19)
EV charging load and the corresponding power generation cost. evcs
where ι  [mevcs ]m
denotes the EVCS availability.
The C-EVRM has a typical bi-level structure, which involves
EVs in each O-D pair would optimize their R&C decisions,
the optimal PDN operation and capacity regulation at the upper
which are formulated as EV charging navigation model:
level, and EV charging navigation and UTN traffic assignment
at the lower level. Compared to P-EVRM, the EVCSs’ available min obj. (10)
(20)
capacity at the upper-level and EVs’ charging choice at the s.t. EV-Cons (11), (14)-(19)
lower-level of C-EVRM are mutually correlated in an implicit C. Upper-level PDN Model
manner.
At the upper level, the PDN operator optimizes EVCS’s
B. Lower-level EV Model available capacity and schedules the power generation. The
At the lower level, EVs would seek the optimum UTN path available EVCS capacity is limited to the maximum EVCS
evcs
in response to the charging capacity information. For  rs   , capacity Pmax :
EV charging navigation [31] aims at finding the least cost 0  pevcs  Pmax
evcs
(21)
feasible path w  rs . An EV path is feasible if the battery We assume a set of distributed generators (DGs) are located at
charge does not drop below a designated level before reaching PDN buses to supply EVCS loads, where their active and
the destination. The arcs on w would connect origin and inactive output are denoted by pdg  [ pidg ]i and
destination nodes as:
q dg  [qidg ]i , respectively. Similarly, the DRG outputs are
Δδ  HΛ T (11) denoted by pdrg  [ pidrg ]i and qdrg  [qidrg ]i , respectively.
o d
where H  H  H is a |  |  |  | matrix: The generation cost of DG units is denoted by
dg dg
C dg ( p dg )  [Ci ( pi )]i .

Authorized licensed use limited to: SHANGHAI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on November 05,2023 at 09:47:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2023.3327689

The PDN operator minimizes the operation cost, including and incorporate the lower-level TAP into the upper-level
the electricity cost of DG units and penalty cost for any DRG problem. The transformed single-level capacity-based EV
curtailments: 发电成本项 分布式发电的限制 惩罚项 regulation model is summarized as:
 
min 1|T|1 C dg pdg  α T sdrg (22) C-EVRM: min obj. (22) 最⼩化 cost

s.t. UTN-Cons (2)-(6), (9)-(10) Urban transportation network

where s drg  [ sidrg ]i denotes the curtailed DRG. Vector α EV-Cons (11), (14)-(19) b
represents the coefficients for penalizing any DRG curtailments. (30)
PDN-Cons (21), (23)-(25), (27)-(28)
The DRG power balance is stated as: Coupling-Cons (8) e
s drg  pdrg  Pmax
drg
(23) MPEC (7) f
drg
where Pmax  [ Pi drg
,max ]i is the available DRG power. The models before and after reconstruction are exactly
The power flow in the radial PDN is depicted by the equivalent because (2)-(11) and (14)-(19) constitutes the KKT
linearized distflow model [32]. The power balances are met as: conditions of the lower-level problem and provides its optimal
ev solution.
pdg  pdrg  Zp  P L  Γppl (24)
dg drg ev L pl
As pevcs is designated by the PDN operator, considering the
q q  q  Q  Γq (25) grid operation constraints, it can be immunized against all
pl pl pl pl uncertainties pertaining to the uncontrolled EV charging
where p  [ pij ]ij and q  [ qij ]ij denote the active and
inactive line flows, respectively. P L  [ Pi L ]i and behavior and stochastic renewable generation. Specifically, in
Q L  [QiL ]i denote the traditional (non-EV) bus loads. deterministic scenarios, the constraints for PDN operation,
ev traffic assignment and EV R&C are simultaneously
qev  [qi ]i denotes the reactive EV load in PDN. Γ is a
|  |  |  | matrix for bus-line incidence: incorporated in C-EVRM, including the bound limits for power
outputs, bus voltages and power flows, and the objective
1, k  i function minimizes the grid operation cost, so the secure and

[ Γ ]k ,ij  1, k  j (26) economic grid operation is guaranteed. When considering
0, else. stochastic resources, available EVCS capacities are optimized

as controllable resources or provide the explicit recourse action
The bus voltage v  [vi ]i would satisfy:
as flexible resources. Moreover, it is more convenient to adjust

Γ T v  RT p pl  X T q pl / V0  (27) available PDN capacities than imposing road tolls since EVCSs
where R  [ Rij ]ij and X  [ X ij ]ij denote the line are directly connected to PDNs.
In line with P-EVRM, the proposed C-EVRM relies on real-
resistance and reactance, respectively. V0 denotes the reference
time communication techniques for EVs acquiring the network
voltage magnitude. The power outputs pi and qi , bus voltage information released by the operator, including travelling time
pl
vi , and power flow pij are within their respective limits: on roads, charging prices, and waiting time and available
umin  u  umax (28) charging capacities at EVCSs. This can be supported via the
The reactive outputs of DRG and charging load are estimated advanced communication technology in the intelligent transport
system [5]. It can be naturally realized as an extension of current
by given power factors. The equations are omitted here.
navigation applications, which already provide EV users
D. Charging Capacity-Based Regulation Model information about the EVCS location and availability [33].
Incorporated with optimal PDN operation, traffic assignment Nevertheless, frequent adjustments of network parameters,
and EV charging navigation, the C-EVRM is bi-level: i.e., available EVCS capacities, would degrade the user
experience. Therefore, it is of practice to design a more efficient
Upper level: min obj. (22)
EVRM that can guarantee secure grid operations while
s.t. PDN-Cons (21), (23)-(25), (27)-(28) alleviating the regulation impact on EV users.
xa road ev
Lower level:min  0 ta dxa +y T t char  λT p  y T τ
a
(29) IV. SOLUTION METHOD AND INVERSE OPTIMIZATION BASED
s.t. UTN-Cons (2)-(6), (9) REGULATION METHOD
EV-Cons (11), (14)-(19) The proposed model is a large-scale mixed-integer problem
Coupling-Cons (8) with MPEC and products of binary and continuous variables,
The upper and lower levels are coupled by the EV charging load which is non-tractable directly by solvers. The adjustment of
ev available EVCS capacities could constrain EV charging choices
p in (8). Based on the Beckmann model [31], the lower-level
objective guarantees the UE condition, stating that the cost of where EV paths would be infeasible. Moreover, the C-EVRM
all actually used paths for each O-D pair is identical and no cannot be solved without the EV path set. Hence, to tackle the
intractability and infeasibility, an improved BP&C based
greater than that of the unused paths.
decomposition algorithm is designed. To be more practical, an
Bi-level problems are NP-hard and non-tractable. To
IO-based EV regulation method is proposed to reduce the user
overcome this, we apply the mathematical program with impact.
equilibrium constraint (MPEC) (7) to include the UE condition

Authorized licensed use limited to: SHANGHAI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on November 05,2023 at 09:47:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2023.3327689
A. Linearization of MPEC
The complementary slackness constraint (7) for UE
condition is linearized by introducing a binary auxiliary
variable μ  [ μ1T , μ2T  μrs
T T
]rsR where μrs  [  w ] wrs :
0| |1  f  μ   ΛF 
 (31)
0| |1  η  Λξ  M (1| |1  μ)
If f w  0 , w  1 ; otherwise, f w  0 , w  0 . (9) is linearized
similarly by a binary auxiliary variable π  [ m ]m :

0|  |1  τ  π  Z T pevcs
 

0|  |1  Z p
T evcs ev
 p  M (1| |1  π )
In addition, the road time function in (2) and electricity cost
function in (22) can be easily transformed into piecewise linear
forms.
B. Decomposition of C-EVRM
The UE-TAP is based on the path set generated by EV
charging navigation model (20). The products of binary and
continuous variables in (5)-(6) and (8) makes the C-EVRM still
non-tractable. The proposed formulation will be a mixed-
integer linear programming (MILP) if all paths are enumerated
a priori. However, this is time-consuming, especially for large-
scale UTN and O-D pair set. Hence, prior CPTN studies
calculated a reduced and offline path set to tackle the
complexity [13], [17]. However, this could lead to sub-optimal
solution since the paths are dependent on CPTN operation
results. Alternatively, this paper solves the problem by
generating the paths iteratively via an improved BP&C
algorithm.
The branch and price (B&P) algorithm is a hybrid of branch
& bound and the column generation (CG) methods. It is widely-
used in the vehicle routing problem, which cannot be solved
directly due to the exponentially increasing number of columns.
It tackles the complexity by subdividing the original problem
into a reduced master problem (RMP) that considers only a
subset of paths and a series of subproblems (SPs), namely the
pricing problems. The RMP provides a lower bound to the
original problem, while the SP is solved to find new variables
to add into the RMP. The B&P algorithm is used in previous
CPTN works [8], [10] to generate EV paths, on the premise that
EVCS capacities are not constrained and the problem is feasible
for any given charging demand. However, it is not the case in
this paper where available EVCS capacities are adjusted to
comply with PDN operation constraints. When the lower-level
formulated EV charging demand exceeds the upper-level
designated charging capacity of EVCSs, the RMP becomes
infeasible and the B&P iteration would be blocked. The B&P
based algorithm does not apply to the proposed C-EVRM where
the path generation subproblem should be adapted to the
available EVCS capacities dynamically.
To overcome the intractability of the large-scale mixed-
integer problem and the infeasibility brought by capacity
adjustment, an improved BP&C algorithm is proposed. It
Authorized licensed use limited to: SHANGHAI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on November 05,2023 at 09:47:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
decomposes the original regulation problem into a reduced
master problem which optimizes the available EVCS capacities,
assigns the traffic flows and schedules the power generation,
and a series of path generation subproblems with cutting planes
engaged to strengthen the SPs if the RMP encounters
infeasibility.
1) Relaxed reduced master problem
A slack variable ε =[ m ]m is added to the charging
capacity limit (32) to identify the EVCSs that lead to
infeasibility:
(32)


0|  |1  τ  π  Z T pevcs  ε 
 T evcs
0|  |1  Z p  ε  pev  M (1| |1  π ) (33)
0
 |  |1  ε
The relaxed RMP for linearized C-EVRM is formulated as:
 
RMP : min 1|T|1 C dg pdg  α T s drg   1|T |1 ε
s.t. PDN-Cons (21), (23)-(25), (27)-(28) (34)
UTN-Cons (2)-(6), (8), (10), (31), (33)
where the penalty factor  ensures that ε will be positive only
when the problem is authentically infeasible. Based on the path
set (iter ) generated by SP, which includes the path
information ( δ(iter ) , γ (iter ) , e (iter ) ), RMP is solved to optimize
the available EVCS capacities and power generation for
minimizing the PDN operation cost.
2) Subproblem (pricing problem)
T
If 1|  |1 ε  0 , RMP is feasible. For each O-D pair rs, SP is
solved to either search new paths with lower costs, or prove that
the current RMP yields an optimal solution for the original
problem by assigning zero flows to all non-generated paths:
SP : min  rs    δrsT t(road T char  T T
iter )  x   γ rs t ( iter )  e    ers λ  γ rs τ (iter )
s.t. EV-Cons (11), (14)-(19)
battery (35)
The SP solution relies on ( t (road char
iter ) , t ( iter ) , τ ( iter ) ) for RMP. The SP
will generate optimal EV paths for each O-D pair using current
traffic conditions. Then, the generated paths are added to the
path set (iter ) .
3) Cutting plane
If 1|T |1 ε
 0 , RMP is infeasible due to the EVCS capacity
T T
limit. If rs  , s.t [Λ γ ε ]rs  0 , the EV charging load in the
O-D pair rs makes the capacity limit violated, which would lead
to RMP infeasibility. Hence, the cutting plane (CP) should be
added to the SP of rs so that the newly-generated paths would
avoid charging at these congested EVCSs:
T
CP : γrsT ,(iter ) γ rs  1|  |1 γ rs,(iter )  1|rs |1 (36)
The above cut is necessary for finding new paths because the
available EVCS capacity is relaxed by (33) and the previously-
generated paths will have the minimum cost without (36).
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2023.3327689
C. Decomposition using Branch Price and Cut Algorithm
The solution procedure is shown in Fig. 4, where the iteration
starts by getting the initial path set via SPs. Then the RMP is
road char
solved and the traffic information ( t (iter ) , t (iter ) , τ (iter ) ) is
transferred to SPs. If RMP needs feasible relaxations, then we
find the EVCSs and O-D pairs that lead to infeasibility, add CP
to SPs, and generate new paths. If RMP is feasible, then we
generate EV paths directly by SPs for each O-D pair, where the
generated paths are added to path set (iter ) for issuing the
next RMP. The algorithm converges if there is no new path
detected for any O-D pair and RMP does not need any
relaxation. The RMP solution with the optimal path set is
equivalent to that of the original problem because they only
differ in the path set and the elimination of redundant paths in
the original problem will not affect the optimal solution.
Detecting all used/active paths is sufficient for the optimal
solution. The algorithm converges in a finite number of
iterations because the number of paths for a given UTN is finite.
The proposed algorithm is applicable to C- and P-EVRMs.
Fig. 4. Flowchart of Proposed Solution Algorithm
D. Inverse Optimization Based EV Regulation Method
The motivation to adopt the inverse optimization technique
for C-EVRM is two-fold. On the one hand, the existing works
elaborate the regulation signals, e.g. charging prices and
available EVCS capacities, from the perspective of network
Authorized licensed use limited to: SHANGHAI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on November 05,2023 at 09:47:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
operators (e.g., UTN, PDN and EVCS operators) to regulate the
EV flows. Whereas, rare concern is made for EV users, on
which the regulation is imposed. In P-EVRM, extra user fees
would be placed on EVs, which could be too heavy to be
implementable; in C-EVRM, available EVCS capacities would
be adjusted. However, EVCSs are expected to be able to operate
at their rated capacities and frequent capacity adjustments could
degrade the user’s experience. Therefore, the expected
operation state could hardly be attained in practice. The
parameter deviation index (PDI) is proposed to estimate the
capacity adjustment:

PDI  1|T|1 1||1  pevcs  Pmax
evcs
/||  (37)
where  represents the element-wise division of vectors.
On the other hand, the C-EVRM in (30) obtains the available
EVCS capacities by minimizing the network operation cost, so
the regulation scheme (i.e. the EVCS capacity adjustment
strategy) is fixed for a given input, which may not be
enforceable in practice due to operational and social factors.
There is still no complete approach that can provide all feasible
EVCS capacity adjustment schemes for the network operator in
the specific application.
It is of practice to devise an enhanced regulation method that
can ensure the secure CPTN operation while minimizing the
impact on EV users. In fact, for any given EV load distributions,
the EVCS capacity adjustment strategy is valid as long as it
satisfies UTN conditions (2)-(10). Using the expected EV load
distribution pev* , an EV regulation model (IO-EVRM), which
is based on inverse optimization, is proposed in (38) to alleviate
the user’s impact:
min obj.(36)
s.t. EV-Cons (11), (14)-(19)
 (2)-(7), (10) (38)
 ev*
UTN-Cons  p  ef
0 T evcs
 |  |1  τ  Z p 
 pev*  0|  |1 
In the IO problem, the EV charging load pev in the
optimization problem of P-EVRM serves as the parameter
(input), which ensures the least-cost PDN operation for IO-
EVRM; the EVCS available capacity pevcs in P-EVRM
becomes a variable (output) in IO-EVRM. The IO approach
could include all feasible regulation schemes for any given
charging load distribution, among which we are merely
interested in finding the one with minimum user’s impact, i.e.,
the one that minimizes the PDI, as stated in (38). This
formulation can be solved by the proposed solution algorithm.
V. CASE STUDIES
A. Overview of Sample System
The proposed model is established for city-scale networks.
Thus, the simulation is carried out on a 41-node and 144-arc
real-world UTN of Xi’an and a 56-bus PDN, depicted in Figs.
5 and 6, respectively. Considering the confidentiality of the
real-world PDN data, the PDN is represented by 4 IEEE-14
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2023.3327689

10

PDNs, which simulate the 110 kV power supply in Xi’an. The
EVCS is accessible at each node, representing the aggregated
regional quantity of charging infrastructures. The travel
demand is simulated by 100 O-D pairs, where the total traffic
demand is 10,000 vehicles/h. The proposed models are
programmed in Yalmip toolbox in Matlab 2021b and solved by
Gurobi. The detailed data for CPTN and O-D pairs can be found
in [34].
If a larger network is requested, e.g., national-level networks,
the traffic assignment model for highways and optimal power
flow model for transmission networks shall be considered,
which are out of scope of this work. Nevertheless, the proposed
solution method is readily applicable for networks with larger
UTN node and PDN bus numbers, however larger
computational burdens would rise. For real applications,
advanced commercial computers can be adopted for calculation
and the path generation SPs can be computed parallelly for
different O-D pairs. When applying the model to a specific
urban network, more EV paths can be computed a prior as initial
path set based on the historic data of travel demands and power
loads, which will further reduce the computational time.
Accordingly, EVs optimize their R&C decisions in a UE setup,
where the available EVCS capacities are fixed. The solution is
obtained by using the KKT conditions to the PDN problem [11].
The results of P-EVRM serve as the benchmark solution.
3) IO-EVRM Case (proposed): Using the benchmarked
charging load distribution, the available EVCS capacities are
optimized by (38) such that the user’s impact is alleviated while
the PDN operation is secure and economic.
B. Analysis of C-EVRM Results
The BP&C-based decomposition algorithm converges after
10 iterations, which generates 214 paths, as depicted in Fig. 7.
It takes 349.37 seconds for the whole iteration. In the first two
iterations, RMP violates the available EVCS capacity limit, and
CPs are added to SPs to generate feasible EV paths. The SP
generates optimal paths for each O-D pair to reduce the travel
cost once the RMP becomes feasible. The CP is effective and
necessary for solving the regulation model, without which the
algorithm will be stuck after the first iteration. At the
convergence, no more path with smaller travel costs can be
detected, signifying that no user would change its path once the
user equilibrium is reached. The proposed algorithm is efficient
in solving the C-EVRM by generating EV paths dynamically.

Fig. 5. Map of Main Roads in Xi’an City

Fig. 7. Number of generated paths
TABLE I
AVAILABLE CHARGING CAPACITY OF EVCSS (KWH)
EVCS pevcs EVCS pevcs EVCS pevcs EVCS pevcs
#6 3672 #17 4751.7 #25 4672.7 #33 2023.9
#8 6000 #19 20.3 #26 940.4 #34 4743.4
#13 2251.7 #20 1171.4 #27 3.7 #35 11.9
#14 3835.8 #21 3.9 #28 2696.1 #38 5751.7
#15 6000 #24 6000 #32 2590.7 #41 3966.0

TABLE II
OPERATION COSTS ($)
Fig. 6. Power Distribution Networks
C-EVRM P-EVRM IO-EVRM
The case studies respond to three questions: 1) Is C-EVGM PDN operation cost 48204.53 48015.36 48293.15
effective in ensuring the secure and economic PDN operation? UTN operation cost 6898.78 7051.76 6898.75
2) Does the proposed C-EVGM outperform the traditional P- CPTN operation cost 55103.31 55067.12 55191.9
EVGM? 3) Is IO-EVGM effective in reducing the user’s impact?
To this end, three cases are compared: The optimized available EVCS capacities are detailed in
1) C-EVRM Case (proposed): The available EVCS Table I. The maximum EVCS capacity is 6,000 kWh. In the C-
capacities are optimized by (30) to coordinate EV flows. EVRM Case, the available EVCS capacity is adjusted by the
2) P-EVRM Case (traditional): The PDN operator schedules PDN operator. The EVs respond to the capacity signal by
power generations and optimizes charging prices λ . considering the congestion cost when optimizing their R&C

Authorized licensed use limited to: SHANGHAI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on November 05,2023 at 09:47:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2023.3327689

11

decisions. The traffic assignment result is visualized in Fig. 8. EVRM. The charging price is set for those scenarios, assuming
The inner ring roads bear heavier traffic loads, which signifies that all EVs respond accordingly, while the operation result is
the need for road expansion. calculated when actually a fraction of EVs respond.
As compared in Table II, the operation costs of PDN and
CPTN in the C-EVRM Case are merely 0.39% and 0.07%
higher than those in the P-EVRM Case, respectively. The traffic
assignment is approximately the same in C-EVRM and P-
EVRM Cases, as compared in Figs. 8 and 9. This demonstrates
that the proposed C-EVRM can achieve the same regulation
effect for the economic PDN operation as that of the traditional
P-EVRM.

Fig. 10. Charging loads for different EV responsiveness

Fig. 8. Traffic flow distribution in the C-EVRM Case

Fig. 11. PDN costs in the P-EVRM Case

TABLE III
CHARGING PRICES AND DLMPS IN THE P-EVRM CASE ($/kWh)
EVCS Charging price DLMP EVCS Charging price DLMP
#2 0.198 0.098 #19 0.231 0.116
#4 0.208 0.098 #24 0.231 0.118
#6 0.207 0.098 #28 0.118 0.124
Fig. 9. Traffic flow distribution in the P-EVRM Case
#8 0.103 0.098 #32 0.231 0.124
C. Comparison of C-EVRM and P-EVRM Performances #9 0.098 0.098 #33 0.218 0.124
Table III lists the charging prices and DLMPs in the P- #13 0.231 0.098 #34 0.225 0.124
EVRM Case. The charging prices are optimized by P-EVRM, #14 0.118 0.125 #35 0.224 0.177
#15 0.207 0.118 #38 0.177 0.128
while the DLMPs are calculated by the dual multipliers of (24).
#17 0.209 0.118 #41 0.231 0.177
P-EVRM and C-EVRM are both effective in regulating the EV
flows, as discussed in Section II-B, if all EVs could be TABLE IV
controlled by price signals. However, P-EVRM would impose EXTRA CHARGING FEE IMPOSED ON EV USERS
extra charging fees (i.e. charging price minus DLMP) on EV Case C-EVRM Case P-EVRM
users, as listed in Table IV, which would greatly degrade the Extra charging fee ($/h) 0 4945
user’s experience and impair the regulation efficiency; while
TABLE V
the proposed C-EVRM requires zero extra fee, which greatly OVERLOADED LINES AND BUSES IN THE P-EVRM CASE
alleviates the adverse system-level regulation impact on users.
EV Responsiveness Number of overloaded lines Number of overloaded buses
Moreover, as discussed in Section II-A, P-EVRM could be
invalid especially for the fast EV charging load that is less 100% 0 0
75% 1 0
sensible to price signals, and thus the PDN operation limits
50% 2 2
would be violated. The scenarios representing different EV
25% 2 2
responsiveness to charging prices are simulated to investigate
0% 4 2
the economic and operational performances of P-EVRM and C-

Authorized licensed use limited to: SHANGHAI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on November 05,2023 at 09:47:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2023.3327689
In three cases, the initial stored energy in EVs for each O-D
pair is the same; while for the same O-D pair, the final stored
energy in each path can be different, because different
regulation methods may lead to different charging choices and
thus different travelling routes. Nevertheless, for a given travel
demand, the total EV charging load in the system level would
not be essentially affected. The total charging energies in three
cases are approximated the same (less than 0.5% difference
from each other). So are the charging energies for different EV
responsiveness rates.
The EV charging load distributions for different
responsiveness rates are visualized in Fig. 10, where the EV
charging load migrates from low to high electricity price areas
when the traveling time becomes more important to EVs than
charging prices. Consequently, Fig. 11 shows that the PDN
operation cost in P-EVRM increases from 48,015 $/h to 48,787
$/h, when the EV responsiveness rate drops from 100% to 0%.
Differently, the C-EVRM is immunized against the
uncontrolled EV charging behaviors by regulating the available
EVCS capacities, so the system operation cost can always be
minimized. Furthermore, Table V shows that the PDN
operation limit could be violated in P-EVRM. Here, up to 4
power lines and 2 buses are overloaded if EV loads are not
regulated as expected, which would mandate the reinforcement
of the PDN infrastructure. In contrast, the secure PDN operation
can always be ensured in C-EVRM. Accordingly, the proposed
C-EVRM outperforms the traditional P-EVRM by maintaining
an economic and secure PDN operation, which would defer any
PDN updates.
D. Performance of IO-EVRM
The rates of change of EVCS charging capacity PDIm and
network operation cost are compared in Fig. 12 and Table II for
IO-EVRM and C-EVRM, respectively. Compared to C-EVRM,
the PDI in IO-EVRM is reduced from 0.49 to 0.37, while the
PDN operation cost remains approximately the same.
Especially, the available capacity of EVCS #19 is adjusted from
6000 to 20.3 kWh in C-EVRM, while it does not need any
adjustment in IO-EVRM.
Fig. 12. Rate of change of available EVCS capacity
The inverse optimization method is proved to greatly reduce
the impact of system regulation on EV users while ensuing the
economic and the secure PDN operation. One the one hand,
with less adjustment on available EVCS capacities, the
proposed method is expected to be more effective in EV
Authorized licensed use limited to: SHANGHAI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on November 05,2023 at 09:47:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
12
regulation for real-world applications. On the other hand, the
IO-EVRM provides a unique approach to obtain all feasible
regulation schemes among which policy-makers can pick the
one that can satisfy specific requirements.
E. Performance of C-EVGM under Uncertainty
The EV regulation methods rely on the prediction of travel
demand, the stochasticity of which could bring operational risks
to PDNs. Fig. 13 shows 5 typical scenarios after the clustering
and scenario reduction technique is applied to the historical data,
for investigating the C-EVRM performance under uncertain EV
travel demands. The charging prices in C-EVRM and the
available EVCS capacities in P-EVRM are designed based on
predictions, while the operation results are obtained based on
uncertain scenarios. As compared in Table VI, the PDN lines
would be overloaded in the traditional P-EVRM when taking
uncertainties into consideration, while the proposed C-EVRM
can always guarantee a secure PDN operation.
Fig. 13. Travel demands for different scenarios
TABLE VI
NUMBER OF OVERLOADED PDN LINES
Base Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario
scenario #1 #2 #3 #4 #5
C-EVRM Case 0 0 0 0 0 0
P-EVRM Case 0 1 2 2 2 1
VI. CONCLUSIONS
This paper proposes a regulation method to manage EV
flows in CPTN, which enhances the PDN operation security by
exploring the use of available EVCS charging capacities as
signals to guide EV charging. First, the bi-level EV regulation
model is proposed, which optimizes the available EVCS
charging capacity and power generation for minimizing the
PDN operation cost at the upper level. The upper-level solution
is applied to assign traffic flows with optimal EV charging and
routing decisions at the lower level. Second, a branch price and
cut-based decomposition algorithm is proposed to solve the
large-scale mixed integer problem with equilibrium constraints.
The original problem is decomposed into a reduced master
problem and a series of subproblems, which are enhanced by
the proposed cutting plane for tackling the prevailing
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2023.3327689
infeasibilities. Third, the proposed model is enhanced by the
inverse optimization technique, which can alleviate the impact
of system regulation on EV users while ensuring a secure PDN
operation. The effectiveness of the proposed model and
algorithm is proved by real-world case studies. In the traditional
price-based method, PDN operation limits will be violated by
the uncontrolled EV charging behaviors and travel demand
uncertainties, while the proposed capacity-based EV regulation
method can always guarantee a secure and economic PDN
operation. The inverse optimization-based regulation method
can effectively reduce the user impact while maintaining the
PDN operation efficiency.
REFERENCES
[1] International Energy Agency (2022). Global Energy Review: CO2
Emissions in 2021. Paris. [Online] Available:
https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-co2-emissions-in-
2021-2.
[2] International Energy Agency (2021). Global EV Outlook 2021. Paris.
[Online] Available: https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2021.
[3] J. Y. Yong, V. K. Ramachandaramurthy, K. M. Tan, and N.
Mithulananthan, “A Review on the state-of-the-art technologies of electric
vehicle, its impacts and prospects,” Renew. Sus.t Energ. Rev., vol. 49, pp.
365-385, Sep. 2015.
[4] Y. J. Sheng, Q. L. Guo, T. Y. Yang, Z. Zhou, and H. B. Sun, “A potential
security threat and ts solution in coupled urban power-traffic networks
with high penetration of electric vehicles,” CSEE J. Power Energy Syst.,
vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 1097-1109, Jul. 2022.
[5] J. W. Xiong, K. L. Zhang, Y. Guo, and W. C. Su, “Investigate the impacts
of PEV charging facilities on integrated electric distribution system and
electrified transportation system,” IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif., vol. 1,
no. 2, pp. 178-187, Aug. 2015.
[6] W. J. Yin, T. Wen, and C. Zhang, “Cooperative optimal scheduling strategy
of electric vehicles based on dynamic electricity price mechanism,”
Energy, vol. 263, Jan. 2023.
[7] W. Wei, D. M. Wu, Q. W. Wu, M. Shafie-Khah, and J. P. S. Catalao,
“Interdependence between transportation system and power distribution
system: a comprehensive review on models and applications,” J. Mod.
Power Syst. Clean Energy, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 433-448, May. 2019.
[8] H. C. Zhang, Z. C. Hu, and Y. H. Song, “Power and transport nexus:
routing electric vehicles to promote renewable power integration,” IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 3291-3301, Jul. 2020.
[9] J. G. Wardrop, “Some theoretical aspects of road traffic research,” Proc.
Inst. Civil Eng., vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 325-363, 1952.
[10] W. Wei, L. Wu, J. Wang, and S. Mei, “Network equilibrium of coupled
transportation and power distribution systems,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid,
vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 6764-6779, Nov. 2018.
[11] C. Shao, K. Li, T. Qian, M. Shahidehpour, and X. Wang, “Generalized user
equilibrium for coordination of coupled power-transportation network,”
IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, pp. 1-1. 2022.
[12] S. Lv, Z. N. Wei, S. Chen, G. Q. Sun, and D. Wang, “Integrated demand
response for congestion alleviation in coupled power and transportation
networks,” Appl. Energy, vol. 283, Feb. 2021.
[13] W. Wei, S. W. Mei, L. Wu, M. Shahidehpour, and Y. J. Fang, “Optimal
Traffic-Power Flow in Urban Electrified Transportation Networks,” IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 84-95, Jan. 2017.
[14] F. He, Y. F. Yin, J. H. Wang, and Y. N. Yang, “Sustainability SI: Optimal
prices of electricity at public charging stations for plug-in electric vehicles,”
Netw. Spat. Econ., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 131-154, Mar. 2016.
[15] Y. J. Sheng, Q. L. Guo, F. Chen, L. Xu, and Y. Zhang, “Coordinated
pricing of coupled urban power-traffic networks: the value of information
sharing,” Appl. Energy, vol. 301, Nov. 2021.
[16] M. Alizadeh, H. T. Wai, M. Chowdhury, A. Goldsmith, A. Scaglione, and
T. Javidi, “Optimal pricing to manage electric vehicles in coupled power
and transportation networks,” IEEE Trans. Control Network Syst., vol. 4,
no. 4, pp. 863-875, Dec. 2017.
Authorized licensed use limited to: SHANGHAI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on November 05,2023 at 09:47:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
13
[17] S. Xie, Q. Wu, N. D. Hatziargyriou, M. Zhang, Y. Zhang, and Y. Xu,
“Collaborative pricing in a power-transportation coupled network: A
variational inequality approach,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., pp. 1-1. 2022.
[18] F. He, Y. F. Yin, and J. Zhou, “Integrated pricing of roads and electricity
enabled by wireless power transfer,” Transp. Res. C-Emerg. Technol., vol.
34, pp. 1-15, Sep. 2013.
[19] S. J. Huang, and Q. W. Wu, “Dynamic Subsidy method for congestion
management in distribution networks,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 9,
no. 3, pp. 2140-2151, May. 2018.
[20] Y. Zheng, X. N. Zhang, and Z. Liang, “Multimodal subsidy design for
network capacity flexibility optimization,” Transp. Res. Part A-Policy
Pract., vol. 140, pp. 16-35, Oct. 2020.
[21] S. Lv, S. Chen, and Z. Wei, “Coordinating urban power-traffic networks:
A subsidy-based Nash–Stackelberg–Nash game model,” IEEE Trans. Ind.
Inf., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 1778-1790, 2023.
[22] A. Kapoor, V. S. Patel, A. Sharma, and A. Mohapatra, “Centralized and
decentralized pricing strategies for optimal scheduling of electric vehicles,”
IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 2234-2244, May. 2022.
[23] S. A. Bagloee, and M. Sarvi, “A modern congestion pricing policy for
urban traffic: Subsidy plus toll,” J. Mod. Transp., vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 133-
149, Sep. 2017.
[24] K. Li, C. Shao, H. Zhang, and X. Wang, “Strategic pricing of electric
vehicle charging service providers in coupled power-transportation
networks,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, pp. 1-1. 2022.
[25] H. Wang, Y. Jia, M. Shi, P. Xie, C. S. Lai, and K. Li, “A Hybrid incentive
program for managing electric vehicle charging flexibility,” IEEE Trans.
Smart Grid, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 476-488. 2023.
[26] R. K. Lyu, Y. X. Gu, and Q. X. Chen, “Electric vehicle charging right
trading: Concept, mechanism, and methodology,” IEEE Trans. Smart Grid,
vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 3094-3105, Jul. 2022.
[27] R. K. Ahu ja, and J. B. Orlin, “Inverse optimization,” Oper. Res., vol. 49,
no. 5, pp. 771-783, Sep. 2001.
[28] K. Li, C. Shao, X. Li, Z. Hu, M. Shahidehpour and X. Wang, "An inverse
optimization method for electric vehicle charging and road toll pricing in
coupled urban transportation and power distribution systems," IEEE Trans.
Smart Grid, pp. 1-1. 2023.
[29] B. o. P. Roads, “Traffic Assignment Manual,” U.S. Dept. of Commerce,
1964.
[30] W. Wei, L. Wu, J. Wang, and S. Mei, “Expansion planning of urban
electrified transportation networks: A mixed-integer convex programming
approach,” IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 210-224, Mar.
2017.
[31] F. He, Y. F. Yin, and S. Lawphongpanich, “Network equilibrium models
with battery electric vehicles,” Transp. Res. Part B-Meth., vol. 67, pp. 306-
319, Sep. 2014.
[32] M. Farivar, and S. H. Low, “Branch flow model: Relaxations and
convexification-part I,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 2554-
2564, Aug. 2013.
[33] EVCS navigation application. [Online] Available:
https://web2.evcs.com/ev-drivers/find-a-charger.
[34] Data for Case Studies. [Online]. Available：https://stuxjtueducn-my.shar
epoint.com/:f:/g/personal/ke_li1997_stu_xjtu_edu_cn/EliGiho0wmFPvp
Dwly7ui6QBlQ0dYWyuTdH0T8UttNsurA?e=f4s1Uh.
Ke Li (Student Member, IEEE) received the B.S. degree
in electrical engineering from Xi’an Jiaotong University,
Xi’an, China, in 2019, where she is currently pursuing the
Ph.D. degree. Her current research interests include the
optimal planning and operation of power and
transportation systems.
 This article has been accepted for publication in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. This is the author's version which has not been fully edited and
content may change prior to final publication. Citation information: DOI 10.1109/TSG.2023.3327689

14

Chengcheng Shao (Member, IEEE) received the B.S.

and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from Xi’an
Jiaotong University, Xi’an, China, in 2011 and 2017,
respectively. He is currently an Associate Professor at
Xi’an Jiaotong University. His research interests include
power and energy system planning and the integration of
large-scale electric vehicles.

Mohammad Shahidehpour (Life Fellow, IEEE) is the

University Distinguished Professor, and Bodine Chair
Professor and Director of Robert W. Galvin Center for
Electricity Innovation at IIT in Chicago, USA. Dr.
Shahidehpour is a Member of the US National Academy
of Engineering, Fellow of the American Association for
the Advancement of Science (AAAS), and Fellow of the
National Academy of Investors.

Xifan Wang (Life Fellow, IEEE) received the B.S.

degree from Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, China, in
1957. He has since been with Xi'an Jiaotong University,
Xi’an, China. From 1983 to 1986, he was a Visiting
Scientist with Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA. From
1991 to 1994, he was a Visiting Professor with Kyushu
Institute of Technology, Japan. He is currently a member
of the Chinese Academy of Science and working as the
Director of the Power System Research Institute in Xi’an
Jiaotong University, Xi’an, China. His research interests include the analysis,
operation, and planning of power systems and novel transmission schemes.

Authorized licensed use limited to: SHANGHAI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on November 05,2023 at 09:47:10 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
© 2023 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.See https://www.ieee.org/publications/rights/index.html for more information.