## Case Study
### Results and Analysis of LA Bidding Strategies
#### 6.3.1 Bidding Strategies during the Load Increase Period  
Based on the optimal bidding strategy in Section 5, the LA selects groups with high willingness to participate, and calculates the optimal bidding plan that meets the constraints of willingness to participate in residential groups of different sizes. Figure 14 shows the different bidding quantities and incentive unit prices during the load increase period, and the number of bidding strategies is 14.  
Figure 12: The response quantity and awareness level of all residential groups.  
Figure 13: Residents’ willingness to participate in DR.  
In each of these strategies, the average willingness of residents to participate in DR is 0.9. Therefore, the compensation value caused by the response exceeding the limit is zero. The total response cost of the aggregator is just the incentive expenditure value of the compensation consumer. It can be found that choosing the residential groups with a high level of response quantity and awareness requires the lowest incentive cost, but the total bidding quantity is low. As the number of responding residential groups is expanded, the total bidding quantity can be increased, and the required incentive cost will increase accordingly. The reason is that the response quantity and awareness level of the newly added groups are low, and higher incentives are needed, so that the willingness to participate in DR can meet the minimum constraint requirements.  
Without considering the willingness, the LA randomly selects a certain number of residents for each bidding strategy in Figure 14, so that the response capacity of the two is approximately equal. Different bidding quantity and compensation unit price are shown in Figure 15. It can be found that as the total bidding quantity is increased, the compensation unit price does not increase in response, but changes randomly. In addition, the compensation unit price without considering the willingness is greater than that considering the willingness. Table 4 shows the percentage decrease of unit price in increasing load period with considering the willingness and without considering the willingness. The response cost of LA during the load increase period is decreased by up to 71% and by an average of 40%. This is mainly because the average willingness of randomly selected residents to respond may be less than 0.9, so the response of aggregators cannot meet the standard. The compensation value caused by the substandard response adds to the LA's total response cost.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Bidding Strategies** & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 & 13 & 14 & average \\ \hline
**Percentage Decrease** & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\
**of Unit Price (\%)** & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 4: The percentage decrease of unit price in increasing load period considering the willingness and without considering the willingness.  
Figure 14: Different bidding quantity and compensation unit price in increasing load period considering the willingness.