Data-driven control, optimization, and decision-making in active power distribution networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper reviews the burgeoning field of data-driven algorithms and their application in solving increasingly complex decision-making, optimization, and control problems within active distribution networks. By summarizing a wide array of use cases, including network reconfiguration and restoration, crew dispatch, Volt-Var control, dispatch of distributed energy resources, and optimal power flow, we underscore the versatility and potential of data-driven approaches to improve active distribution system operations. The categorization of these algorithms into four main groups-mathematical optimization, end-to-end learning, learning-assisted optimization, and physics-informed learning-provides a structured overview of the current state of research in this domain. Additionally, we delve into enhanced algorithmic strategies such as non-centralized methods, robust and stochastic methods, and online learning, which represent significant advancements in addressing the unique challenges of active distribution systems. The discussion extends to the critical role of datasets and test systems in fostering an open and collaborative research environment, essential for the validation and benchmarking of novel data-driven solutions. In conclusion, we outline the primary challenges that must be navigated to bridge the gap between theoretical research and practical implementation, alongside the opportunities that lie ahead. These insights aim to pave the way for the development of more resilient, efficient, and adaptive active distribution networks, leveraging the full spectrum of data-driven algorithmic innovations.
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 | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".