Service Restoration Using Deep Reinforcement Learning and Dynamic Microgrid Formation in Distribution Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A resilient power distribution network can reduce length and impact of power outages, maintain continuous services, and improve reliability. One effective way to enhance the system's resilience is to form microgrids during outages. In this article, a novel dynamic microgrid formation-based service restoration method using deep reinforcement learning is proposed, and it is treated as a Markov decision process (MDP) while taking operational and structural limitations of microgrids into account. The deep Q-network is employed to obtain optimal control strategies for microgrid formation. We have introduced a new way for the agent to choose actions when building a microgrid using the deep Q-learning method, which ensures that the microgrid has a feasible radial structure. The proposed service restoration method enables real-time computing to facilitate online formation of dynamic microgrids and adapts to changing conditions. The influence of optimal switch placement on service restoration using proposed method is also investigated. The effectiveness of proposed service restoration method is validated by case studies using the modified IEEE 33-node test system and a real 404-node distribution system operated by Saskatoon Light and Power in Saskatoon, Canada.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".