Multi-Attribute Partitioning of Power Networks Based on Electrical Distance
Abstract
Identifying coherent sub-graphs in networks is important in many applications. In power systems, large systems are divided into areas and zones to aid in planning and control applications. But not every partitioning is equally good for all applications; different applications have different goals, or attributes, against which solutions should be evaluated. This paper presents a hybrid method that combines a conventional graph partitioning algorithm with an evolutionary algorithm to partition a power network to optimize a multi-attribute objective function based on electrical distances, cluster sizes, the number of clusters, and cluster connectedness. Results for the IEEE RTS-96 show that clusters produced by this method can be used to identify buses with dynamically coherent voltage angles, without the need for dynamic simulation. Application of the method to the IEEE 118-bus and a 2383-bus case indicates that when a network is well partitioned into zones, intra-zone transactions have less impact on power flows outside of the zone; i.e., good partitioning reduces loop flows. This property is particularly useful for power system applications where ensuring deliverability is important, such as transmission planning or determination of synchronous reserve zones.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A power network can be clustered based on static network parameters such as line impedance/admittance or dynamic parameters such as power flows, line losses, voltage variations.
“A power network can be clustered based on static network parameters such as line impedance/admittance or dynamic parameters such as power flows, line losses, voltage variations [12], [26], [39].”
From Chance constrained day-ahead robust flexibility needs assessment for low voltage distribution network (2022) · cites this paper as [39]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hashmi, M. U., Koirala, A., Ergun, H., & Van Hertem, D. (2022) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2207.10234 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Cotilla-Sanchez, E., Hines, P. D. H., Barrows, C., Blumsack, S., & Patel, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Vermont (US)
- National Laboratory of the Rockies (US)
- Pennsylvania State University (US)
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Power Systems
- Published
- 2013-11
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 4979-4987
- ISSN
- 0885-8950 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-0679
- OpenAlex
- W2024758500
- Cited by
- 263
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 17 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 9.60
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Power Systems (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Power System Optimization and Stability
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Electric Power System Optimization
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Optimal Power Flow Distribution
- Keywords
- power system partitioning, graph partitioning, multi-attribute optimization, electrical distance, evolutionary algorithms, loop flows, transmission planning, IEEE RTS-96, IEEE 118-bus system
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