EnleashedEnleashed
Fix the energy market
Draft

Fair Play Automatic Market Maker (FP-AMM)

A continuously clearing market architecture for coordinating distributed energy resources across the electricity system. FP-AMM combines an Automatic Market Maker, holarchical coordination, stateful fairness and Shapley-based settlement to deliver reliable, economically coherent and transparent operation of modern power systems.

Solution section

Evidence

Papers, simulations, code, results and supporting analysis.

Scientific Evidence Programme

FP-AMM Evidence

The FP-AMM framework separates two fundamentally different questions in electricity market design.

The operational mechanism coordinates electricity consumption, generation and storage through continuously updated local price signals that respond to the evolving physical state of the network. The investment mechanism recognises the long-run system value created by those operational behaviours and allocates fixed-cost recovery using Shapley theory.

Together they form a complete cyber-physical market architecture linking operational coordination to long-term investment incentives.

Overall Architecture

Physical Electricity System
Generation, storage, demand and network constraints
Operational Signal
FP-AMM clearing • Real-time & forward coordination
Behaviour
Consumption • Generation • Storage
Investment Signal
Shapley system-value settlement
Future Electricity System
Investment changes future physical scarcity

Two distinct questions. One coherent market architecture.

Electricity systems require both short-run operational coordination and long-run investment incentives. FP-AMM deliberately separates these problems while linking them through a common physical interpretation of system value. Operational price signals coordinate behaviour in real time. Persistent operational value is then translated into long-run investment remuneration through the Shapley settlement.

Operational Evidence

FP-AMM Clearing

Does the mechanism coordinate the electricity system effectively?

Demonstrates how electricity is coordinated continuously using sequential request processing, rolling future state and local network constraints.

Experiments
  • • O1 — One-node sequential clearing
  • • O2 — Forward flexibility
  • • O3 — Network bottleneck
  • • O4 — Holarchical coordination
  • • O5 — Large-scale sequential clearing
Explore operational evidence →
Investment Evidence

Shapley Settlement

Does the settlement/investment mechanism reward system value appropriately?

Demonstrates how persistent system contribution is translated into fair long-run investment remuneration using Shapley theory.

Evidence
  • • Characteristic function
  • • Generator decomposition
  • • Cost recovery
  • • Consumer allocation
  • • Sensitivity analysis
Explore investment evidence →

Common Experimental Environment

Both evidence streams are evaluated using the same network-constrained benchmark comprising an identical transmission network, generation fleet, demand profile, physical constraints and temporal resolution. This ensures that differences arise from the market mechanism rather than the underlying electricity system.

Scientific Claims

The evidence programme is organised around a set of scientific claims. Each claim is supported by one or more experiments that test specific properties of the proposed market architecture.

Fair allocation under scarcity

Testing

When flexible capacity is insufficient, allocation should remain fair over time rather than being determined solely by willingness to pay.

Tested by

System-value investment signals

Testing

Persistent scarcity, network constraints, availability and substitutability should be reflected in long-run remuneration so that investment signals align with physical system value.

Tested by

Continuous decentralised coordination

Untested

Requests can be processed sequentially without requiring synchronised central scheduling of every participating device.

Tested by