The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A comparison of the AC and DC power flow models for LMP calculations
Abstract
The paper examines the tradeoffs between using a full ac model versus the less exact, but much faster, dc power flow model for LMP-based market calculations. The paper first provides a general discussion of the approximations associated with using a dc model, with an emphasis on the impact these approximations will have on security constrained OPF (SCOPF) results and LMP values. Then, since the impact of the approximations can be quite system specific, the paper provides case studies using both a small 37 bus system and a somewhat larger 12,965 bus model of the Midwest U.S. transmission grid. Results are provided comparing both the accuracy and the computational requirements of the two models. The general conclusion is that while there is some loss of accuracy using the dc approximation, the results actually match fairly closely with the full ac solution.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Stott, B., Jardim, J., & Alsac, O. (2009) · IEEE Transactions on Power Systems · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2009.2021235 · Cited by 1,052
Geometry of injection regions of power networks
Zhang, B., & Tse, D. (2013) · IEEE Transactions on Power Systems · doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2012.2208205 · Cited by 118
Metadata
- Authors
- Overbye, T. J., Cheng, X., & Sun, Y.
- Venue
- 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2004
- Pages
- 9 pp.
- ISSN
- 1530-1605 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2111416445
- Cited by
- 329
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 12.01
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A comparison of the AC and DC power flow models for LMP calculations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/hicss.2004.1265164
- The paper
- Overbye, T. J., Cheng, X., & Sun, Y. (2004). A comparison of the AC and DC power flow models for LMP calculations. 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the. https://doi.org/10.1109/hicss.2004.1265164
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
