A Comparative Study of Reinforcement Learning Algorithms for Distribution Network Reconfiguration With Deep Q-Learning-Based Action Sampling
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Distribution network reconfiguration (DNR) is one of the most important methods to cope with the increasing electricity demand due to the massive integration of electric vehicles. Most existing DNR methods rely on accurate network parameters and lack scalability and optimality. This study uses model-free reinforcement learning algorithms for training agents to take the best DNR actions in a given distribution system. Five reinforcement algorithms are applied to the DNR problem in 33- and 136-node test systems and their performances are compared: deep Q-learning, dueling deep Q-learning, deep Q-learning with prioritized experience replay, soft actor-critic, and proximal policy optimization. In addition, a new deep Q-learning-based action sampling method is developed to reduce the size of the action space and optimize the loss reduction in the system. Finally, the developed algorithms are compared against the existing methods in literature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it