The rapid integration of electric vehicles (EVs) and decentralized renewable energy sources is transforming urban power systems, while simultaneously increasing the complexity of real-time coordination across charging infrastructure, distributed energy resources, and grid-support devices. This systematic review synthesizes recent research on multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) for EV–grid coordination, with emphasis on four emerging dimensions: forecasting-informed control, safety-constrained learning, explainability and interpretability, and trustworthy decentralized coordination. A systematic literature search was conducted in IEEE Xplore, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, MDPI, and arXiv, covering primarily the period 2016–2025, with selected early-2026 studies retained where relevant, with selected earlier foundational studies retained for context. The review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 framework. A total of 412 records were identified through database searching; after duplicate removal and screening, 58 studies were included in the final qualitative synthesis. The reviewed literature shows that MARL is increasingly being applied to EV charging coordination, demand-side management, community energy systems, transactive energy, and ancillary grid services. The evidence further indicates that forecasting integration improves anticipatory control, safety-aware formulations enhance operational reliability, and explainability-oriented designs help address transparency and trust barriers in safety-critical grid environments. However, the literature remains limited by heterogeneous benchmarks, inconsistent evaluation metrics, and a lack of real-world deployment evidence. This review provides a structured synthesis of current methodologies, identifies critical research gaps, and outlines future directions for the development of safe, interpretable, and deployment-ready MARL frameworks for urban energy systems.
Nazloo et al. (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: