Game Design and Analysis for Price based Demand Response: An
Aggregate Game Approach

arXiv:1508.02636v3 [q-fin.EC] 1 Feb 2016

Maojiao Ye, Student Member, IEEE, and Guoqiang Hu, Member, IEEE
Abstract— In this paper, an aggregate game is adopted for
the modeling and analysis of energy consumption control in
smart grid. Since the electricity users’ cost functions depend
on the aggregate energy consumption, which is unknown to
the end users, an average consensus protocol is employed to
estimate it. By neighboring communication among the users
about their estimations on the aggregate energy consumption,
Nash seeking strategies are developed. Convergence properties
are explored for the proposed Nash seeking strategies. For
energy consumption game that may have multiple isolated Nash
equilibria, a local convergence result is derived. The convergence is established by utilizing singular perturbation analysis
and Lyapunov stability analysis. Energy consumption control
for a network of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning
(HVAC) systems is investigated. Based on the uniqueness of
the Nash equilibrium, it is shown that the players’ actions
converge to a neighborhood of the unique Nash equilibrium
non-locally. More specially, if the unique Nash equilibrium is
an inner Nash equilibrium, an exponential convergence result
is obtained. Energy consumption game with stubborn players
is studied. In this case, the actions of the rational players can
be driven to a neighborhood of their best response strategies by
using the proposed method. Numerical examples are presented
to verify the effectiveness of the proposed methods.
Index Terms— Energy consumption control; aggregate game;
Nash equilibrium seeking

I. INTRODUCTION
Demand response schemes are designed to motivate the
electricity users to adjust their energy consumptions to the
desired profile based on supply conditions [1]. Due to the
benefits, such as improving system reliability, efficiency,
security and customer bill savings, great efforts have been
dedicated to control and optimization problems related to
demand response in smart grid (e.g., see [2]-[5] and the references therein). The electricity users are categorized as pricetakers and price-anticipating users in the existing literatures
[7]. The price-takers schedule their energy consumptions
regardless of their effect on the electricity price. In contrast,
the price-anticipating users consider the impact of their
energy consumptions on the electricity price. Industrial users
and commercial users with large energy consumption are
typical examples of price-anticipating users. Taking the price
as a function of the aggregate energy consumption brings
up coupled energy consumption control problems among the
electricity users.
M. Ye and G. Hu are with the School of Electrical and Electronic
Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, 639798, Singapore (Email:
mjye@ntu.edu.sg, gqhu@ntu.edu.sg).
This work was supported by Singapore Economic Development Board
under EIRP grant S14-1172-NRF EIRP-IHL.

Game theory is an effective modeling and analysis tool to
deal with the interactions among the electricity consumers
[2]. Game theoretical approaches such as stackelberg game,
evolutionary game, differential game, just to name a few,
have been extensively utilized to design and analyze demand
response schemes in smart grid (e.g., [8]-[21]). For example, in [8], Stackelberg game was leveraged to model the
interaction between the demand response aggregators and
generators. The Nash equilibrium of the game among the
generators was computed via solving a centralized quadratic
optimization problem. In [9], the authors considered peakto-average ratio (PAR) minimization and energy cost minimization by designing a non-cooperative energy consumption
game. By communicating among the players on their scheduled daily energy consumptions, a Nash seeking strategy
was proposed. A coupled-constraint game was used in [10]
for scheduling residential energy consumption. Noticing that
the best response algorithm suffers from privacy concern, a
gradient projection method based on estimations of the price
changing trend was proposed at the cost of computation time
and memory. Multiple utility companies were considered in
[11] where the authors used a two-level game approach to
manage the interactions. The competition among the utility
companies was described by a non-cooperative game. The
users were modeled as evolutionary game players. Considering the system dynamics, a differential game approach
was proposed in [12]. In this paper, the energy consumption
control is considered as an aggregate game [22]-[24] on
graph.
Related Work: The main objective of this paper is to
achieve Nash equilibrium seeking (e.g., see [26]-[30] and
the references therein for an incomplete reference list) in
energy consumption game. Different from many Nash seeking strategies where full communication among the players
is used, in [25] and [30], the Nash equilibrium is attained
by utilizing neighboring communication. An aggregate game
(e.g., see [22]-[25]) in which the players interact through
the sum of the players’ actions was investigated in [25].
By utilizing a gossip algorithm, the players can search for
the Nash equilibrium through neighboring communication.
This idea was further generalized in [30]. The players were
considered to be generally interacting with each other. The
game on graph was then solved via using a gossip algorithm.
Similar to [25] and [30], this paper leverages the idea of game
on graph to solve energy consumption game in smart grid.
This paper aims to solve energy consumption control for
a network of price-anticipating electricity users. Compared
with the existing works, the main contributions of the paper

A. Game Theory

are summarized as follows.
•

•

•

An aggregate game is adopted for the modeling and
analysis of energy consumption control in smart grid.
By using game on graph, the users update their actions based on the communication with their neighbors.
This scheme reduces the communication between the
electricity users with the centralized agent (e.g., energy
provider). Hence, the single-node congestion problem
is relieved.
An aggregate game that may admit multiple isolated
Nash equilibria is firstly considered. Based on an average consensus protocol, a Nash seeking strategy is
proposed for the players. An energy consumption game
for a network of heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) systems, in which the Nash equilibrium
is unique, is investigated. The Nash seeking strategy
is designed based on a primal-dual dynamics. More
specifically, if the unique Nash equilibrium is an inner
Nash equilibrium, an exponential convergence result
is derived. Energy consumption game with stubborn
players is studied. It is shown that with the presence of
stubborn players, the rational players’ actions converge
to a neighborhood of their best response strategies. The
proposed Nash seeking strategies serve as alternative
approaches for the gossip-algorithm in [25] to solve
aggregative game on graph.
The end-users only need to communicate with their
neighbors on their estimations of the aggregate energy
consumption. They don’t need to share their own energy
consumptions with their opponents. Hence, the privacy
of the electricity users is protected.

The rest of the paper is structured as follows. In Section
II, some related preliminaries are provided. System model
and the problem formulation are given in Section III. A
general energy consumption game that may have multiple
Nash equilibria is studied in Section IV without considering
the constraints. Energy consumption game among a network
of HVAC systems is investigated in Section V. In Section VI,
numerical examples are provided to verify the effectiveness
of the proposed methods. Conclusions and future directions
are stated in Section VII.
II. P RELIMINARIES

AND

N OTATIONS

In this paper, R represents for the set of real numbers, R+
stands for the set of non-negative real numbers and R++ is
the set of positive real numbers. Furthermore, diag{ki } for
i ∈ {1, 2, · · · , N } is defined as


k1 0 · · · 0

 0 k2


,
diag{ki } =  .
.
.
..
.. 

 ..
0 ···
kN
and [hi ]vec for i ∈ {1, 2, · · · , N } is defined as [hi ]vec =
[h1 , h2 , · · · , hN ]T .

Below are some definitions on game theory [24]-[34].
Definition 1: A game in normal form is defined as a triple
Γ , {N, X, C} where N = {1, 2, · · · , N } is the set of N
players, X = X1 × · · · × XN , Xi ⊂ R is the set of actions
for player i, and C = (C1 , · · · , CN ) where Ci is the cost
function of player i.
Definition 2: (Potential game) A game Γ is a potential
game if there exists a function P such that
∂P (li , l−i )
∂Ci (li , l−i )
=
,
(1)
∂li
∂li
∀i ∈ N. Furthermore, the function P is the potential
function. In (1), li denotes the action of player i and, l−i
denotes all the players’ actions other than the action of player
i, i.e., l−i = [l1 , · · · , li−1 , li+1 , · · · , lN ]T .
Definition 3: (Aggregate game) An aggregate game is a
normal form game with the players’ cost functions depending
only on its own action and a linear aggregate of the full action
profile.
Definition 4: (Nash equilibrium) Nash equilibrium is an
action profile on which no player can reduce its cost by
unilaterally changing its own action, i.e., an action profile
l∗ = (li∗ , l∗−i ) ∈ X is the Nash equilibrium if for all the
players
Ci (li∗ , l∗−i ) ≤ Ci (li , l∗−i ), ∀i ∈ N
(2)
for all li ∈ Xi .
For
Pan aggregate game Γ with the aggregate function being
l̄ = N
i=1 li , an equilibrium of the aggregate game Γ is an
action profile l∗ ∈ X on which ∀i ∈ N
Ci (li∗ , li∗ +

N
X

lj∗ ) ≤ Ci (li , li +

j=1,j6=i

N
X

lj∗ ), ∀li ∈ Xi

j=1,j6=i

∗
and
PN the∗ associated equilibrium aggregate is denoted as l̄ =
i=1 li .

B. Graph Theory

For a graph defined as G = (V, E) where E is the
edge set satisfying E ⊂ V × V with V = {1, 2, · · · , N }
being the set of nodes in the network, it is undirected if
for every (i, j) ∈ E, (j, i) ∈ E. An undirected graph
is connected if there exists a path between any pair of
distinct vertices. The element in the adjacency matrix A
is defined as aij = 1 if node j is connected with node i,
else, aij = 0. The neighboring set of agent i is defined as
Ni = {j ∈ V |(j, i) ∈ E}. The Laplacian matrix for the
graph L is defined as L = D̄ − A where D̄ is defined as a
diagonal matrix whose ith diagonal element
is equal to the
P
out degree of node i, represented by N
a
.
ij
j=1
C. Dynamic Average Consensus

Theorem 1: [39], [40] Let G be a connected, undirected
graph, L be the Laplacian of G. Then, for any constant ω ∈
RN , the state of the following system

 

 

ẋ
−I − L −L
x
ω
=
+
,
ẏ
L
0
y
0

and limin , limax are the minimal and maximal acceptable
energy consumption for user i, respectively. The problem
is defined as follows.
Problem 1: (Strategy Design for the Electricity Consumers in the Energy Consumption Game) In the energy
consumption game, the electricity users are the players. The
energy consumption li and Ci (li , l̄) are the action and cost
of player i, respectively. Player i’s objective is defined as

Generation network
Generator 2

Generator M
.......

Generator i
.......
Generator 1
wholesale price

demand
power transmission and
distribution

Energy providers
demand

retail price

.......

.......

EMC
AMI

EMC
AMI

EMC
AMI

.......

EMC
AMI

min Ci (li , l̄)

.......

user N

user j

user 1

.......

.......

EMC
AMI

li

subject to limin ≤ li ≤ limax , i ∈ N,

.......

.......

user i

user 2
User network

Fig. 1: A simplified illustration of the electricity buying and
selling model.

with arbitrary initial conditions x(0), y(0) ∈ RN remains
bounded and x(t) converges exponentially to N1 1T ω1 as
t → ∞ where 1 denotes an N dimensional column vector
composed of 1.
D. Saddle Point
The pair (x∗ , y∗ ) is the saddle point of F (x, y) if
F (x∗ , y) ≤ F (x∗ , y∗ ) ≤ F (x, y∗ ),

(3)

is satisfied [5], [6].
III. S YSTEM M ODEL AND P ROBLEM F ORMULATION
Consider an electricity market with a network of N
price-anticipating users. The simplified illustration of the
electricity buying and selling model is shown in Fig. 1.
The users are equipped with an energy-management
controller (EMC) and an advanced metering infrastructure
(AMI) [38]. The EMC is used to schedule the electricity
usage for the corresponding user. The AMI enables bidirectional communication among the electricity users and the
centralized agent (e.g., the energy provider). The communication between the electricity users and their neighbors can
be modeled by an undirected and connected graph. In this
paper, we suppose that the electricity users schedule their
energy consumption by minimizing their own costs.
Let li be the energy consumption of user i. Then, the cost
of user i can be quantified as [38],
Ci (li , l̄) = Vi (li ) + P (l̄)li ,

(4)

where ¯l is the aggregatePenergy consumption of all the
N
electricity users, i.e., l̄ = j=1 lj . Furthermore, Vi (li ) is the
load curtailment cost [38]. The term P (l̄)li represents the
billing payment for the consumption of energy li where the
price P (l̄) is a function of the aggregate energy consumption
l̄.
For each user, the energy consumption should be within
its acceptable range, i.e., li ∈ [limin , limax ] where limin < limax

where N = {1, 2, · · · , N } denotes the set of electricity
users. The aggregate energy consumption ¯l is unknown to
the players. Suppose that the pure-strategy Nash equilibrium
exists and is isolated. Furthermore, Ci , i ∈ N are smooth
functions over RN . Design a control strategy for the players
such that they can search for the Nash equilibrium.
Remark 1: In practice, providing the aggregate energy
consumption l̄ to all the users is challenging for the centralized agent when the users are dynamically updating their
actions. Hence, we consider the Nash equilibrium seeking
under the condition that the users have no access to the
aggregate energy consumption l̄. But the users are allowed
to communicate with their neighbors on the estimations of
the aggregate energy consumption. Furthermore, we suppose
that the centralized agent can broadcast the total number of
electricity users N to all the electricity users in the network.
In summary, the energy consumption control considered
in this paper is based on the following assumption.
Assumption 1: The electricity users can communicate
with their neighbors via an undirected and connected graph.
Furthermore, the total number of the electricity users, N , is
known to all the electricity users.
IV. E NERGY C ONSUMPTION G AME D ESIGN
A NALYSIS

AND

In this section, the energy consumption game is considered
in the general form (the pricing function is not specified). For
simplicity, the constraints limin ≤ li ≤ limax , i ∈ N, are not
considered in this section.
A. Game Analysis
Before we proceed to facilitate the subsequent analysis,
the following assumptions are made.
Assumption 2: [29] There exists isolated, stable Nash
equilibrium on which
∂Ci ∗
(l ) = 0,
∂li
∂ 2 Ci ∗
(l ) > 0, ∀i ∈ N
∂li2
where l∗ denotes the Nash equilibrium.

(5)

Assumption 3: [29] The matrix
 2
∂ 2 C1
∂ C1 ∗
(l∗ ) · · ·
(l ) ∂l
∂l21
1 ∂l2

 ∂ 2 C2 ∗
2
 ∂l ∂l (l ) ∂∂lC22 (l∗ )
1
2

2
B=
..
..

.
.
 2
∂ CN
∗
···
∂l1 ∂lN (l )

and
2

∂ C1
∂l1 ∂lN

(l∗ )

..
.

∂ 2 CN
∂l2N

(l∗ )










κ̇µ = 0,

(6)

is strictly diagonally dominant.
Inspired by [25], let Di denote player i’s estimation on the
aggregate energy consumption. By using the estimations, the
players’ objectives can be rewritten as:
Problem 2: Player i’s objective is
min Ci (li , Di ),

(7)

li

PN
where Di = j=1 lj , ∀i ∈ N.
In the following, a consensus based method will be
proposed to search for the Nash equilibrium of the energy
consumption game (without considering the constraints).
B. Nash Equilibrium Seeking for the Aggregate Energy Consumption Game
Based on the consensus protocol in [39]-[40], the Nash
seeking strategy for player i, i ∈ N is designed as
Ḋi = −Di −
κ̇i =

X

X

(Di − Dj ) −

j∈Ni

(Di − Dj )

X

(κi − κj ) + N li (8a)

j∈Ni

(8b)

j∈Ni

∂P (Di )
∂Vi
+ P (Di ) + li
),
l˙i = −k̄i (
∂li
∂Di

(8c)

where Ni denotes the neighboring set of player i, k̄i =
δki , i ∈ N, δ is a small positive parameter and ki is a fixed
positive parameter. Furthermore, κi , i ∈ N are intermediate
variables.
Writing (8) in the concatenated form gives

 

 

−I − L −L
D
Nl
Ḋ
=
+
(9a)
L
0
κ
0
κ̇
∂P (Di )
∂Vi
+ P (Di ) + li
]vec ), (9b)
l̇ = − δk([
∂li
∂Di
where k is defined as k = diag{ki }, i ∈ N, D, κ, l
are the concatenated vectors of Di , κi , li , respectively. Let
e , µ] be an N × N dimensional orthonormal matrix
U = [U
such that µT L = 0 where µ is an N dimensional column
e
κ
where e
κ is an N − 1
vector. Furthermore, let κ = U
κµ
dimensional column vector [5]. Then, the closed-loop system
can be rewritten as
#

 "
 

e
Ḋ
−I − L −LU
D
Nl
=
+
(10a)
eT L
e
κ
0
ė
κ
U
0
l̇ = −δk([

∂P (Di )
∂Vi
+ P (Di ) + li
]vec ),
∂li
∂Di

(10b)

(11)

which indicates that κµ (t) = κ(0).
e e (l) are the quasi-steady states of
Suppose that De (l), κ
e , respectively, i.e.,
D and κ
"
#
 

e
−I − L −LU
De (l)
Nl
+
= 0, (12)
eT L
e e (l)
κ
0
U
0

e#e (l) is unique for fixed l as
for fixed l. "Note that De (l), κ
e
−I − L −LU
the matrix
is Hurwitz [40]. Then, by
T
e
U L
0
direct calculation, it can be derived that


−I − L −L
L
0



De (l)
e
U [(e
κ (l))T , κµ ]T



+



Nl
0



= 0,

(13)
which indicates that De (l) is the equilibrium of the original
system. Hence,
PN by using Theorem 1, it can be concluded that
De (l) = 1 i=1 li for fixed l.
Theorem 2: Suppose that Assumptions 1-3 hold. Then,
there exists a positive constant δ ∗ such that for every
e (t)) converges exponentially to
0 < δP< δ ∗ , (l(t), D(t), κ
N
e ∗
∗
∗
e (l )) under (10) given that ||l(0) − l∗ ||,
(l , 1 i=1 li , κ
PN ∗
||D(0) − 1 i=1 li ||, ||e
κ(0) − κ
ee (l∗ )|| are sufficiently small.
Proof: Let τ = δt. Then, in the τ -time scale, the reducedsystem is
#
 

 dD  "
e
δ dτ
−I − L −LU
D
Nl
=
+
(14a)
κ
eT L
e
κ
0
δ de
U
0
dτ
∂P (Di )
∂Vi
dl
+ P (Di ) + li
]vec ).
= −k([
dτ
∂li
∂Di

(14b)

Quasi-steady state analysis: letting δ = P
0 freezes D and
e at the quasi-steady state on which Di = N
κ
j=1 lj , ∀i ∈ N.
Hence, the reduced-system is
∂P (Di )
∂Vi
dl
+ P (Di ) + li
]vec )
= − k([
dτ
∂li
∂Di
∂Ci (li , l−i )
]vec ).
= − k([
∂li

(15)

Linearizing (15) at the Nash equilibrium point l∗ gives,
dl
= −kB(l − l∗ ),
(16)
dτ
where −kB is Hurwitz by Assumption 3 and the Gershgorin
Circle Theorem [48]. Hence, the equilibrium point l∗ is locally exponentially stable under (15), i.e., there exist positive
constants ̺1 and ̺2 such that (denote the trajectory of (15)
as lr (τ ))
||lr (τ ) − l∗ || ≤ ̺1 e−̺2 τ ||lr (0) − l∗ ||,

(17)

given that ||lr (0) − l∗ || is sufficiently small.
e e (l)) satisfies,
Boundary-layer analysis: Since (De (l), κ
"
#
 

e
−I − L −LU
De (l)
Nl
+
= 0, (18)
eT L
e e (l)
κ
0
U
0

e
e e (l)
it can be derived
" that D (l), κ
# are linear functions of l
e
−I − L −LU
as the matrix
is non-singular.
eT L
U
0
Let
′
D = D − De
(19)
′
e = κ − κe .
κ

Then,
"

δ

′

dD
dτ′
de
κ
dτ

#

"

#

e
D′ + De
−I − L −LU
=
eT L
e′ + κ
ee
κ
U
0
"


T #
∂DeT
Nl
∂l
+
−δ
T
0
e eT
∂κ


From the analysis, it can be seen that all the states in (8)
stay bounded and l(t) produced by (8) converges to the Nash
equilibrium under the given conditions.
In this section, a Nash seeking strategy is proposed without
requiring the uniqueness of the Nash equilibrium. In the following section, energy consumption game for HVAC systems
where the Nash equilibrium is unique will be considered.
V. E NERGY C ONSUMPTION G AME AMONG A N ETWORK
OF HVAC S YSTEMS
For HVAC systems, the load curtailment cost may be
modeled as [38]
Vi (li ) = ν i ξ 2i (li − l̂i )2 , i ∈ N,

∂l

N
X
∂Vi
+ P (Di′ +
lj )
× (−k([
∂li
j=1
P
∂P (Di′ + N
j=1 lj )
]vec ))
+ li
PN
′
∂(Di + j=1 lj )
"
#

e
D′
−I − L −LU
=
eT L
e′
κ
U
0
#
"
T
N
∂DeT
X
∂Vi
′
∂l
(−k([
−δ
lj )
+
P
(D
+
T
i
e eT
∂κ
∂li
j=1
∂l
P
∂P (Di′ + N
j=1 lj )
]vec )).
+ li
P
N
∂(Di′ + j=1 lj )
(20)
Hence, in t-time scale
"
"
#
′ #

dD
e
D′
−I − L −LU
dt′
=
′
eT L
de
κ
e
κ
U
0
dt
#
"
eT T
∂D
∂Vi
∂l
(−k([
−δ
T
e eT
∂κ
∂li
∂l
(21)
N
X
′
lj )
+ P (Di +
j=1

PN
∂P (Di′ + j=1 lj )
+ li
]vec )).
PN
∂(Di′ + j=1 lj )

Letting δ = 0 gives the boundary-layer model of (14) as
"

#

=

Since the matrix

"

′

dD
dt′
de
κ
dt

"

−I − L
eT L
U

−I − L
eT L
U

#" ′ #
e
D
−LU
′
.
(22)
0
e
κ
#
e
−LU
is Hurwitz, the equi0
′

′

e =0
librium point of the boundary-layer model D = 0, κ
is exponentially stable, uniformly in (t, l).
Therefore, by Theorem 11.4 in [42], it can be concluded
that there exists
a positive constant δ ∗ such that for all 0 <
PN
∗
∗
e e (l∗ )) is exponentially stable under
δ < δ , (l , 1 i=1 li∗ , κ
(10).

(23)

> 0 and ˆli is
where ν i and ξ i are thermal coefficients,
the energy needed to maintain the indoor temperature of the
HVAC system. When the pricing function is
ν i ξ 2i

P (l̄) = a

N
X

li + p0 ,

(24)

i=1

2ν ξ 2

i i
where a is a non-negative constant and a < mini∈N N −3
for
N > 3, the uniqueness of the Nash equilibrium is ensured
[38].
Based on this given model, a Nash seeking strategy
will be proposed in this section for the players to search
for the unique Nash equilibrium (by assuming that a <
2ν i ξ 2i
for N > 3 in the rest of the paper).
mini∈N N −3

A. Nash Equilibrium Seeking for Energy Consumption Game
of HVAC Systems
Lemma 1: The energy consumption game is a potential
game with a potential function being
Q(l) =

N
X

ν i ξ 2i (li −l̂i )2 +

N
X
i=1

i=1

a(

N
X

lj )li +

j=1,j6=i

N
X

(ali2 +p0 li ).

i=1

(25)

Proof: Noticing that
∂Q(l)
∂Ci (l)
=
, ∀i ∈ N,
∂li
∂li

(26)

the conclusion can be derived by using the definition of
potential game.

Based on the primal-dual dynamics in [43], the Nash
seeking strategy for player i is designed as
X
X
Ḋi = −Di −
(Di − Dj ) −
(κi − κj ) + N li
j∈Ni

κ̇i =

X

j∈Ni

(27a)

(Di − Dj )

(27b)

j∈Ni

∂Vi
+ P (Di ) + ali − η i1 + η i2 )
l˙i = −k̄i (
∂li
η̇ i1 = m̄i1 η i1 (limin − li )
η̇ i2 = m̄i2 η i2 (li − limax ), i ∈ N

(27c)
(27d)
(27e)

where m̄ij = δmij for all i ∈ N, j ∈ {1, 2}, mij are fixed
positive parameters and η ij (0) > 0, i ∈ N, j ∈ {1, 2}.
By introducing the orthonormal matrix U as in Section
IV-B, the system in (27) can be rewritten as
#

 "
 

e
Ḋ
−I − L −LU
D
Nl
=
+
(28a)
eT L
e
κ
0
ė
κ
U
0
∂Vi
+ P (Di ) + ali − η i1 + η i2 )
∂li
= m̄i1 η i1 (limin − li )

l̇i = −k̄i (

η̇ i1

η̇ i2 = m̄i2 η i2 (li −

limax ), i

∈N

(28b)
(28c)
(28d)

and
κ̇µ = 0.

(29)

Theorem 3: Suppose that Assumption 1 is satisfied. Then,
there exists β ∈ KL such that for each pair of strictly positive
real number (∆, v), there exists δ(∆, v) > 0, such that
||χ(t)|| ≤ β(||χ(0)||, δt) + v,

(30)

for all t ≥ 0, ||χ(0)|| ≤ ∆ under (28) given that η ij (0) >
0,P
i ∈ N, j ∈ {1, 2}. In (30), χ(t) = [(l(t) − l∗ )T , (D(t) −
N
e e (l∗ ))T , (η(t) − η ∗ )T ]T , and η, η ∗
1 i=1 li∗ )T , (e
κ(t) − κ
are defined in the subsequent proof.
Proof: Following the proof of Theorem 2 by using singular
perturbation analysis, the reduced-system in τ -time scale is
given by
N
X
dli
lj + p0 + ali − η i1 + η i2 )
= −ki (2ν i ξ 2i (li − l̂i ) + a
dτ
j=1

dη i1
= mi1 η i1 (limin − li )
dτ
dη i2
= mi2 η i2 (li − limax ), i ∈ N.
dτ

(31)
According to Lemma 1, the energy consumption game is
a potential game. Hence, the Nash seeking can be achieved
by solving
min Q(l)
l

subject to

limin

≤ li ≤

limax , i

(32)

∈ N.

In the following, we show that (31) can be used to solve
the problem in (32).
the Lagrangian function as L(l, η) = Q(l) +
PDefine
N
min
− li ) + η i2 (li − limax )) where η =
i=1 (η i1 (li
2N
[η 11 , η 12 , η 21 , η 22 , · · · , η i1 , η i2 , · · · , η N 1 , η N 2 ]T ∈ R+
.
The dual problem for the minimization problem in (32) can
be formulated as
max min L(l, η).
η≥0

1
VL = (l − l∗ )T k−1 (l − l∗ )+
2
2
N X
X
1
(η ij − η ∗ij − η ∗ij log(ηij ) + η ∗ij log(η ∗ij )),
m
ij
i=1 j=1
(34)
where (l∗ , η ∗ ) is the saddle point of L(l, η), it can be shown
that the saddle point of L(l, η) is globally asymptotically
stable under (31) by Corollary 2 of [43] given that η ij (0) >
0, i ∈ N, j ∈ {1, 2}.
Hence, the strategy in (31) enables l to converge to the
Nash equilibrium of the potential game asymptotically.
Combining this result with the exponential stability of the
boundary-layer system (see Theorem 2 for boundary-layer
analysis), the result can be derived by using Lemma 1 in
[44] (see also [45] for more details).

B. Nash Equilibrium Seeking for Energy Consumption Game
of HVAC Systems with A Unique Inner Nash Equilibrium
In the following, energy consumption game with a unique
inner Nash equilibrium is considered 1 . If the constraints
do not affect the value of the Nash equilibrium, the Nash
seeking strategy can be designed as
X
X
Ḋi = −Di −
(Di − Dj ) −
(κi − κj ) + N li
j∈Ni

X

j∈Ni

(35a)

(Di − Dj )

(35b)

∂Vi
+ P (Di ) + ali ).
l˙i = −k̄i (
∂li

(35c)

κ̇i =

j∈Ni

By introducing the orthonormal matrix U as in Section
IV-B, the system in (35) can be rewritten as


Ḋ
ė
κ



=

"

−I − L
eT L
U

l̇i = −k̄i (

e
−LU
0

#

D
e
κ



+



Nl
0

∂Vi
+ P (Di ) + ali ), i ∈ N
∂li

a

···
···
..
.

a
a
..
.

· · · 2ν N ξ 2N + 2a





.




(36a)
(36b)

and
κ̇µ = 0.

The Hessian matrix of Q(l) is

2ν 1 ξ 21 + 2a
a
2

a
2ν
ξ
+ 2a
2
2

H =
..

.
a

(33)

l

2ν ξ 2

i i
for N > 3, H is positive definite by
Since a < mini∈N N −3
the Gershgorin Circle Theorem [48]. Hence, Q(l) is strictly
convex in l as its Hessian matrix is positive definite. Noting
that the inequality constraints are linear, the problem in (32)
has strong duality [47]. Hence, l∗ is the optimal solution to
2N
the problem in (32) if and only if there exists η ∗ ∈ R+
such
∗
∗
that (l , η ) is the saddle point of L(l, η) by the saddle point
theorem [47].
By defining the Lyapunov candidate function as [43]

(37)

Theorem 4: Suppose that Assumption 1 is satisfied. Then,
there exists a positive constant δ ∗ such that for every
1 To make it clear, in this paper, we say that the Nash equilibrium is
an inner Nash equilibrium if the Nash equilibrium satisfies limin < li∗ <
i
= 0, ∀i ∈ N.
limax , ∀i ∈ N, i.e., the Nash equilibrium is achieved at ∂C
∂l
i

e (t)) converges exponentially to
0 < δP< δ ∗ , (l(t), D(t), κ
N
e e (l∗ )) under (36).
(l∗ , 1 i=1 li∗ , κ
Proof: Following the proof of Theorem 2 by using singular
perturbation analysis, the reduced-system at τ -time scale is
given by

Furthermore,
∂Vj
+ P (Dj ) + alj − η j1 + η j2 )
l˙j = −k̄j (
∂lj
η̇ j1 = m̄j1 η j1 (ljmin − lj )

(44)

η̇ j2 = m̄j2 η j2 (lj − ljmax ), j ∈ N, j 6= i
N
X
dli
lj + p0 + ali ), i ∈ N.
= −ki (2ν i ξ 2i (li − ˆ
li ) + a
dτ
j=1
(38)
From (38), it can be derived that

ėl = −kHel,

(39)

where el(t) = l − l∗ .
Hence, it can be shown that in τ -time scale
s
maxi∈N {ki } − mini∈N {ki }λmin {H}τ e
||el(τ )|| ≤
e
||l(0)||,
mini∈N {ki }
(40)
by defining the Lyapunov candidate function as VL =
1eT −1e
l [29].
2l k
Combining this result with the exponential stability of the
boundary-layer system (see Theorem 2 for boundary-layer
analysis), the conclusion can be derived by Theorem 11.4 in
[42] (see the proof of Theorem 2 for more details) .

Remark 2: When the constraints do not affect the value
of the Nash equilibrium, the updating strategy in (35) is a
special case of the one in (8). It can be seen that the result
in Theorem 4 is stronger than the result in Theorem 2 under
the given HVAC model.
C. Energy Consumption Game of HVAC Systems with Stubborn Players
In this section, a special case where some players commit
to the coordination process while keeping a constant energy
consumption is considered. Without loss of generality, we
suppose that player i is a stubborn player and updates its
action according to
X
X
Ḋi = −Di −
(Di − Dj ) −
(κi − κj ) + N lis ,
j∈Ni

κ̇i =

X

j∈Ni

(41a)

(Di − Dj ),

(41b)

if all the rational players adopt (27), and
∂Vj
l˙j = −k̄j (
+ P (Dj ) + alj ), j ∈ N, j 6= i
∂lj

if all the rational players adopt (35).
Corollary 1: Suppose that Assumption 1 is satisfied.
Then, there exists β ∈ KL such that for each pair of strictly
positive real number (∆, v), there exists δ(∆, v) > 0, such
that
||χbr (t)|| ≤ β(||χbr (0)||, δt) + v,
(46)
for all t ≥ 0, ||χbr (0)|| ≤ ∆ under (42) and (44)
given that η kj (0) > 0, k ∈ N, k 6= i, j ∈ {1, 2}.
P
br
In (46), χbr (t) = [ľ−i (t)T , (D(t) − 1( N
j=1,j6=i lj +
e
s T
br T T
e (lbr
lis ))T , (e
κ(t) − κ
−i , li )) , (η −i (t) − η −i ) ] , ľ−i (t) =
T
[ľ1 (t), · · · , ľi−1 (t), ľi+1 (t), · · · , ľN (t)] , ľj (t) = lj (t) −
ljbr , j ∈ N, j 6= i and ljbr denotes the best response strategy of
br
player j, lbr
−i is the concatenated vector of lj , i ∈ N, j 6= i,
br
η −i , η −i are defined in the subsequent proof.
Furthermore, if the constraints ljmin ≤ lj ≤ ljmax , j ∈
N, j 6= i do not affect the values of the best response
∗
strategies, then, there exists a positive constant
PNδ suchbrthat
∗
for every 0 < δ < δ , (ľ−i (t), D(t) − 1( j=1,j6=i lj +
s
e (t)− κ
e e (lbr
lis ), κ
−i , li )) converges exponentially to zero under
(42) and (45).
Proof: Following the proof of Theorem 2 by using singular
perturbation analysis to get the reduced-system for both
cases. The first part of the Corollary can be derived by
noticing that the following is satisfied,
′

∂Cj
∂Q (l−i )
=
,
∂lj
∂lj

′

Q (l−i ) =

Ḋ
ė
κ



=

"

e
−I − L −LU
T
e
U L
0

#

+

N
X

ν j ξ 2j (lj − l̂j )2 +

N
X

j=1,j6=i

D
e
κ

+



Nl
0



, (42)

a(

N
X

lk )lj

k=1,k6=i,k6=j

(alj2 + (p0 + alis )lj ).

j=1,j6=i

(48)

Define
′

′

L (l−i , η −i ) = Q (l−i ) +

N
X

η j1 (ljmin − lj )

j=1,j6=i



+

N
X

η j2 (lj −

(49)

ljmax ),

j=1,j6=i

in which the ith component of l is fixed to be lis , and
κ̇µ = 0.

N
X

j=1,j6=i

j∈Ni



(47)

for all j 6= i, where

lis

where
is the constant energy consumption of player
i. Furthermore, all the rational players adopt (35) if the
constraints do not affect the value of all the players’ best
response strategies, else, all the rational players adopt (27).
By introducing the orthonormal matrix U as in Section
IV-B, then

(45)

2(N −1)

(43)

where η −i ∈ R+
denotes the concatenated vector of
η jk , j ∈ N and j 6= i, k ∈ {1, 2}.

Then, the dual problem is

5

1

′

max min L (l−i , η−i ).

η −i ≥0 l−i

Noticing that lbr
−i is the best response strategies of the rational
2(N −1)
players if and only if there exists η br
such that
−i ∈ R+
′
br
br
(l−i , η −i ) is the saddle point of L (l−i , η −i ), the rest of the
proof follows that of Theorem 3.
If the constraints ljmin ≤ lj ≤ ljmax , j ∈ N, j 6= i do not
affect the value of the best response strategies and all the
rational players adopt (35), then, the reduced-system at the
quasi-steady state is
∂Cj (l−i )
dlj
= −kj
dτ
∂lj
= −kj [2ν j ξ 2j (lj − ˆ
lj ) + a

N
X

lj + p0 + alis + alj ]

2

4

3

Fig. 2: Communication graph for the electricity users
TABLE I: Parameters in the simulation.
ˆ
li (kWh)
limax (kWh)
limin (kWh)
a
p0 (MU/kWh)

user 1
50
60
40

user 2
55
66
44

user 3
60
72
46
0.04
5

user 4
65
78
52

user 5
70
84
56

j=1,j6=i

= −kj [2ν j ξ 2j ľj + a

N
X

ˇ
lj + aľj ], i ∈ N.

j=1,j6=i

Writing (50) in the concatenated form gives

A. Simulation Setup

dľ−i
= −kH1 ľ−i ,
dτ

(51)

where H1 ∈ RN −1 × RN −1 is defined as

h1





H1 = 


 .
 ..

a

a
..
.

···

a

hi−1

hi+1
..
.
···

VI. N UMERICAL E XAMPLES

(50)

..
.
hN
2ν ξ 2







,





i i
with hj = 2ν j ξ 2j + 2a. Since a < mini∈N N −3
for N > 3,
it can be derived that the matrix H1 is symmetric and strictly
diagonally dominant with all the diagonal elements positive.
Hence, the matrix −kH1 is Hurwitz by the Gershgorin Circle
Theorem [48].
By similar analysis in Theorem 4, the conclusion can be
derived.

Remark 3: In this Corollary, only one player (i.e., player
i) is supposed to be stubborn. However, this is not restrictive
as similar results can be derived if multiple stubborn players
exist.
Remark 4: In the proposed Nash seeking strategy, the
players only communicate with its neighbors on Di and κi .
They do not communicate on their own energy consumption
li . Hence, the proposed Nash seeking strategy does not
lead to privacy concern for the users. The work in [29]
provided an extremum seeking method to seek for the Nash
equilibrium in non-cooperative games. However, the method
in [29] can’t be directly implemented for Nash seeking
in the energy consumption game if the aggregate energy
consumption is not directly available to the players.

In this section, we consider a network of 5 commercial/industrial users that are equipped with HVAC systems.
The electricity users communicate with each other via an
undirected and connected graph as shown in Fig. 2. The cost
function for electricity user i is
Ci (li , l̄) = ν i ξ 2i (li − ˆli )2 + P (l̄)li ,
(52)
PN
where the pricing function P (l̄) = a i=1 li + p0 [38].
Without loss of generality, suppose that ν i ξ 2i for all i ∈ N
are normalized to 1 in the simulation. For i ∈ {1, 2, 3, 4, 5},
limin = 0.8l̂i and limax = 1.2l̂i except that in Section VI-B,
l1min and l1max are set separately. The parameters are listed
in Table I2 .
B. Energy Consumption Control of HVAC Systems
In this section, we suppose that l1min = 45 and l1max =
55. By direct computation, it can be derived that the Nash
equilibrium is l∗ = (45, 46.4, 51.3, 56.2, 61.1)(kWh). The
equilibrium aggregate is l̄∗ = 259.9(kWh). Hence, the Nash
equilibrium is not an inner Nash equilibrium.
The simulation results by using the seeking strategy in
(27) are shown in Figs. 3-4.
Fig. 3 shows the users’ electricity energy consumptions
produced by the proposed seeking strategy in (27) and Fig.
4 indicates that the users’ estimations on the aggregate
energy consumptions converge to the actual aggregate energy
consumption.
From the simulation results, it can be seen that the energy
consumptions produced by the proposed method converge to
the Nash equilibrium of the energy consumption game.
2 MU

stands for Monetary Unit.

70

D. Energy Consumption Control with Stubborn Players

50
40
30
20

User 1’s electricity energy consumption
User 2’s electricity energy consumption
User 3’s electricity energy consumption
User 4’s electricity energy consumption
User 5’s electricity energy consumption

10
0
0

5

10
Time (Seconds)

15

20

Estimations of the aggregate energy consumption

Fig. 3: The users’ energy consumptions produced by the
proposed seeking strategy in (27).

300

250

VII. C ONCLUSIONS

200

150

100

The actual aggregate energy consumption
User 1’s estimation on the aggregate energy consumption
User 2’s estimation on the aggregate energy consumption
User 3’s estimation on the aggregate energy consumption
User 4’s estimation on the aggregate energy consumption
User 5’s estimation on the aggregate energy consumption

50

0
0

5

10
Time (Seconds)

15

20

Fig. 4: The actual aggregate energy consumption and the
users’ estimations on the aggregate energy consumption
produced by the proposed seeking strategy in (27).

C. Energy Consumption Control of HVAC Systems with A
Unique inner Nash equilibrium
In this section, we consider the energy consumption
game under the setting in Section VI-A. By direct calculation, it can be derived that the Nash equilibrium is
l∗ = (41.5, 46.4, 51.3, 56.2, 61.1)(kWh). The equilibrium
aggregate is l̄∗ = 256.7(kWh). The Nash equilibrium is an
inner Nash equilibrium and the seeking strategy in (35) is
used in the simulation. The simulation results produced by
the seeking strategy in (35) are shown in Figs. 5-6.

70
60
Users’ energy consumptions

In this section, we suppose that player 5 is a stubborn
player that commits to a constant energy consumption l5s =
100(kWh). Then, player 1-4’s best response strategies are
40.8(kWh), 45.7(kWh), 50.6(kWh), and 55.5(kWh), respectively. The aggregate energy consumption is 292.7(kWh). In
the simulation, the rational players adopt (35) to update their
actions. The stubborn player uses the seeking strategy in (41).
The simulation results produced by the proposed method are
shown in Figs. 7-8.
It can be seen that with the presence of the stubborn player,
all the other players’ actions converge to the best response
strategies with respect to the stubborn action.
AND

F UTURE W ORK

This paper considers energy consumption control among
a network of electricity users. The problem is solved by
using an aggregative game on an undirected and connected
graph. To estimate the aggregate energy consumption, which
is supposed to be unknown to the players during the Nash
seeking process, an average consensus protocol is employed.
The convergence property is analytically studied via using
singular perturbation and Lyapunov stability analysis. A
general energy consumption game where multiple Nash equilibria may exist is firstly considered. A Nash seeking strategy
based on consensus is proposed to enable the users to search
for the Nash equilibrium. Energy consumption control of
HVAC systems with linear pricing functions is then studied.
Convergence results are provided. Furthermore, stubborn
players are investigated and it is shown that the rational
players’ actions converge to the best response strategies.
For future directions, the following aspects would be
considered:
1) The design of incentive provoking mechanisms. As
Nash solution is usually not efficient from the systemlevel perspective, socially optimal solution might be
preferred if coordination is allowed. Incentive provoking mechanisms can be designed to motivate the electricity users to coordinate such that system efficiency
can be improved [5].
2) Analysis of the energy consumption game with the
existence of cheaters. This includes the detection of

50
40
30
User 1’s electricity energy consumption
User 2’s electricity energy consumption
User 3’s electricity energy consumption
User 4’s electricity energy consumption
User 5’s electricity energy consumption

20
10
0
0

5
Time (Seconds)

10

Fig. 5: The users’ energy consumptions produced by the
proposed seeking strategy in (35).

From the simulation results, it can be seen that the
users’ energy consumptions converge to the unique Nash
equilibrium.

Estimations on the aggregate load energy consumption

Users’ energy consumptions

60

300

250

200

150

100

50

0
0

The actual aggregate energy consumption
User 1’s estimation on the aggregate energy consumption
User 2’s estimation on the aggregate energy consumption
User 3’s estimation on the aggregate energy consumption
User 4’s estimation on the aggregate energy consumption
User 5’s estimation on the aggregate energy consumption
5
Time (Seconds)

10

Fig. 6: The actual aggregate energy consumption and the
users’ estimations on the aggregate energy consumptions
produced by the seeking strategy in (35).

120

Users’ energy consumptions

100
80
60
40
User 1’s electricity energy consumption
User 2’s electricity energy consumption
User 3’s electricity energy consumption
User 4’s electricity energy consumption
User 5’s electricity energy consumption

20
0
0

5
Time (Seconds)

10

Fig. 7: The users’ energy consumptions produced by the
proposed method (i.e., the rational players adopt (35) and
the stubborn player adopts (41)).

cheaters, the design of penalty (e.g., [49]) or reward
algorithms to prevent cheating behaviors, etc.
3) Nash seeking for energy consumption game under
various communication conditions.
R EFERENCES
[1] L. Gelazanska and K. Gamage, “Demand side management in smart
grid: a review and proposals for future direction,” Sustainable Cites
and Society, Vol. 11, pp. 22-30, 2014.
[2] J. Vardakas, N. Zorba and C. Verikoukis, “A survey on demand
response programs in smart grid: pricing methods and optimization
algorithms,” IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, Vol. 17,
pp. 152-178, 2014.
[3] G. Wen, G. Hu, J. Hu, X. Shi and G. Chen, “Frequency regulation
of source-grid-load systems: a compound control strategy,” IEEE
Transactions on Industrial Informatics, accepted, to appear, DOI:
10.1109/TII.2015.2496309.
[4] W. Yu, G. Wen, X. Yu, Z. Wu and J. Lv, “Bridging the gap between
complex networks and smart grids,” Journal of Control and Decision,
Vol. 1, pp. 102-114, 2014.
[5] M. Ye and G. Hu, “Distributed extremum seeking for constrained networked optimization and its application to energy consumption control
in Smart Grid,” IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology,
accepted, to appear, DOI. 10.1109/TCST.2016.2517574.
[6] M. Ye and G. Hu, “A distributed extremum seeking scheme for
networked optimization,” IEEE Conference on Decision and Control,
pp. 4928-4933, 2015.
[7] P. Samadi, H. Mohsensian-Rad, R. Schober and V. Wong, “Advanced
demand side management for future smart grid using mechanism
design,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, Vol. 3, pp. 1170-1180,
2012.
[8] E. Nekouei, T. Alpcan and D. Chattopadhyay, “Game-theoretic frameworks for demand response in electricity markets,” IEEE Transactions
on Smart Grid, Vol. 6, pp. 748-758, 2014.

The aggregate energy consumption

300
250

200
150
100
50
0
0

The actual aggregate energy consumption
User 1’s estimation on the aggregate energy consumption
User 2’s estimation on the aggregate energy consumption
User 3’s estimation on the aggregate energy consumption
User 4’s estimation on the aggregate energy consumption
User 5’s estimation on the aggregate energy consumption
5
Time (Seconds)

10

Fig. 8: The actual aggregate energy consumption and the
users’ estimations on the aggregate energy consumption
produced by the proposed method (i.e., the rational players
adopt (35) and the stubborn player adopts (41)).

[9] H. Mohsenian-Rad, V. Wong, J. Jatskevich, R. Schober and A. Garcia, “Autonomous demand-side management based on game-theoretic
energy consumption scheduling for the future smart grid,” IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid, Vol. 1, pp. 320-331, 2010.
[10] R. Deng, Z. Yang, J. Chen, N. Asr and M. Chow, “Residential energy
consumption scheduling: a coupled contraint game approach,” IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid, Vol. 5, pp. 1340-1350, 2014.
[11] B. Chai, J. Chen, Z. Yang and Y. Zhang, “Demand response management with multiple utility companies: a two level game approach, ”
IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, Vol. 5, pp. 722-731, 2014.
[12] N. Forouzandehmehr, M. Esmalifalak. H. Mohsenian-Rad and Z. Han,
“Autonomous demand response using stochastic differential games,”
IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, Vol. 6, pp. 291-300, 2015
[13] C. Wu, H. Mohsenian-Rad and J. Huang, “Vehicle-to-aggregator
interaction game,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, Vol. 3, pp. 434442, 2012.
[14] W. Tysgar, B. Chai, C. Yuen, D. Smith, K. Wood, Z. Yang and H. Poor,
“Three-party energy management with distributed energy resources in
smart grid,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, Vol. 62, pp.
2487-2497, 2015.
[15] F. Meng and X. Zeng, “A stackelberg game-theoretic approach to
optimal real-time pricing for smart grid,” Springer Soft Computing,
Vol. 17, pp. 2365-2830, 2013.
[16] W. Tushar, J. Zhang, D. Smith, H. Poor and S. Thiebaux, “Prioritizing
consumers in smart grid: a game theoretic approach,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, Vol. 5, pp. 1429-1438, 2014.
[17] S. Bu, F. Yu, Y. Chai, and X. Liu, “When the smart grid meets
the energy efficient communications: green wireless cellular networks
powered by the smart grid,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communication, Vol. 11, pp. 3014-3024, 2012.
[18] G. Asimakopoulou, A. Dimeas and N. Hatziargyriou, “Leader-follower
strategies for energy management of multi-microgrids,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, Vol. 4, pp. 1909-1916, 2013.
[19] P. Yang, G. Tang and A. Nehorai, “A game-theoretic approach for
optimal time-of-use electricity pricing,” IEEE Transactions on Power
System, Vol. 28, pp. 884-892, 2013.
[20] L. Chen, N. Li, S. Low and J. Doyle, “Two market models for demand
response in power networks,” IEEE SmartGridComm, pp. 397-402,
2010.
[21] S. Maharjan, Q. Zhu, Y. Zhang, S. Gjessing and T. Barsar, “Dependable demand response management in the smart grid: a stackelberg
game approach,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, Vol. 4, pp. 120132, 2013.
[22] M. Jesen, “Aggregate games and best-reply potentials,” Econom.
Theory, Vol. 43, pp. 45-66, 2010.
[23] D. Acemoglu and M. Jensen, “Aggregate comparative statics,” Games
and Economic Behavior, vol. 81, pp. 27-49, 2013.
[24] D. Martimort and L. Stole, “Representing equilibrium aggregates in
aggregate games with applications to common agency,” Games and
Economic Behavior, Vol. 76, pp. 753-772, 2012.
[25] J. Koshal, A. Nedic and U. Shanbhag, “A gossip algorithm for aggregate games on graphs,” IEEE Conference on Decision and Control,
pp. 4840-4845, 2012.
[26] M. Zhu and E. Frazzoli, “On distributed equilibrium seeking for generalized convex games,” IEEE Conference on Decision and Control,
pp. 4858-4863, 2012.
[27] B. Gharesifard and J. Cortes, “Distributed convergence to Nash
equilibria in two-network zero-sum games,” Automatica, Vol. 49, pp.
1683-1692, 2013.
[28] S. Stankovic, K. H. Johansson, and D. M. Stipanovic, “Distributed
seeking of Nash equilibria with applications to mobile sensor networks,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, Vol. 57, pp.904-919,
2012
[29] P. Frihauf, M. Krstic and T. Basar, “Nash equilibrium seeking in noncoopearive games,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, Vol. 57,
pp. 1192-1207, 2012.
[30] F. Salehisadaghiani and L. Pavel, “Nash equilibrium seeking by a
gossip-based algorithm,” IEEE Conference on Decision and Control,
pp. 1155-1160, 2014.
[31] M. Ye and G. Hu, “Game design for price based demand response,”
IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting, pp. 1-5, 2015.
[32] M. Ye and G. Hu, “Distributed seeking of time-varying Nash equilibrium for non-cooperative games,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic
Control, Vol. 60, pp. 3000-3005, 2015.

[33] J. Nash, “Non-cooperative games,” Ann. Math., Vol. 54, pp. 286-295,
1951.
[34] D. Monderer and L. Shapley, “Potential games,” Games and Economic
Behavior, Vol. 14, pp. 124-143, 1996.
[35] P. Dubey, O. Haimanko and A. Zapechelnyuk, “Strategic complements
and substitutes and potential games,” Games and Economic Behavior,
Vol. 54, pp. 77-94, 2006.
[36] A. Ozguler and A. Yildiz, “Foraging swarms as Nash equilibria of
dynamic games,” IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, Vol. 44, pp. 979987, 2014.
[37] Y. Yang and X. Lim “Towards a snowdrift game optimization to vertex
cover of networks,” IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, Vol. 43m pp.
948-956, 2013.
[38] K. Ma, G. Hu and C. Spanos, “Distributed energy consumption control
via real-time pricing feedback in smart grid,” IEEE Transactions on
Control Systems Technology, Vol. 22, pp. 1907-1914, 2014.
[39] R. Freeman, P. Yang and K. Lynch, “Stability and convergence properties of dynamic average consensus estimators,” IEEE Conference on
Decision and Control, pp. 398-403, 2006.
[40] A. Menon and J. Baras, “Collaborative extremum seeking for welfare
optimization,” IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, pp. 346351, 2014.
[41] A. Wood and B. Wollenberg, Power generation, Operation and Control,
Wiley, New York, 1996.
[42] H. Khailil, Nonlinear System, Prentice Hall, 3rd edtion, 2002.
[43] H. Durr, E. Saka and C. Ebenbauer, “A smooth vector field for
quadratic programming,” IEEE Conference on Decision and Control,
pp. 2515-2520, 2012.
[44] Y. Tan, D. Nesic and I. Mareels, “On non-local stability properties of
extremum seeking control,” Automatica, Vol. 42, pp. 889-903, 2006.
[45] A. Teel, L. Moreau, and D. Nesic, “A unified framework for input-tostate stability in systems with two time scales,” System and Control
Letters, Vol. 48, pp. 1526-1544 , 2003.
[46] Z. Feng, G. Hu and G. Wen, “Distributed consensus tracking for multiagent systems under two types of attacks,” International Journal of
Robust and Nonlinear Control, Vol. 26, pp. 896-918, 2016.
[47] S. Boyd and L. Vandenberghe, Convex optimization, Cambradge
University Press, 2004.
[48] R. Horn and C. Johnson, Matrix Analysis, Cambridge,
U.K.:Cambridge Univ. Press, 1985.
[49] K. Ma, G. Hu and C. Spanos, “A cooperative demand response scheme
using punishment mechanism and application to industrial refrigerated
warehouses,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, Vol. 11, pp.
1520-1531, 2015.

