Abstract

Electric vehicle (EV) charging has a large, spatially clustered, schedulable load whose vehicle-to-grid flexibility can be sold back to the power system. That flexibility has grid value only when the committed quantity can be reliably delivered under uncertainty. Open forecasting benchmarks operators rely on report-only point predictions. The dispatch models that turn forecasts into firm commitments assume a constant round-trip efficiency, so the committed flexibility is systematically over-scheduled. This study contributes two complementary modules, validated separately on public data. The first is a calibrated probabilistic charging forecaster that provides, to our knowledge, the first prediction intervals with reported empirical coverage on the UrbanEV benchmark. It is a gradient-boosted quantile-regression model that combines each zone’s own-history lags with adjacency-weighted neighbor-mean features and exogenous price and calendar inputs. It is calibrated by conformalized quantile regression and scored over thirty zones across a 120-day hourly window. The second is a deliverable-flexibility envelope whose returnable-energy bounds are set by measured, state-of-charge- and rate-dependent vehicle-to-grid (V2G) discharge efficiency rather than a constant round-trip number. These bounds are fit to the measured discharge traces of three V2G-capable vehicles in the Esser bidirectional-charging dataset. Chosen as a lightweight, reproducible baseline, the forecaster keeps its prediction intervals within a five-percentage-point coverage tolerance at both the 80% and 90% nominal levels. Measured coverage is 0.823 and 0.911. It also improves on the continuous ranked probability score of its conformalized-point counterpart at matched point accuracy. This calibration holds across the hyperparameter neighborhood and under data deficiency. On the delivery side, a leave-one-vehicle oracle shows the efficiency-aware envelope short-delivers less than the constant-average-efficiency aggregator on held-out vehicles. Its residual shortfall is 1.21% against the aggregator’s 2.03% at the conservative operating point. The margin widens as commitments grow more aggressive and discharges reach the lowest states of charge. Each of these two measured properties, calibrated demand-side uncertainty and state-dependent discharge physics, imposes a material, separately validated constraint on how much contracted EV flexibility can be delivered, a constraint the point-forecasting frontier leaves unaddressed.

IPC Classification

Keywords