Cited by 137Microgrid Control and OptimizationOptimal Power Flow DistributionSmart Grid Energy Management

Multi-Agent Safe Policy Learning for Power Management of Networked Microgrids

Open access
Zhang, Qianzhi, Dehghanpour, Kaveh, Wang, Zhaoyu, Qiu, Feng, Zhao, Dongbo·2021·IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid

Abstract

This article presents a supervised multi-agent safe policy learning (SMAS-PL) method for optimal power management of networked microgrids (MGs) in distribution systems. While unconstrained reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms are black-box decision models that could fail to satisfy grid operational constraints, our proposed method considers AC power flow equations and other operational limits. Accordingly, the training process employs the gradient information of operational constraints to ensure that the optimal control policy functions generate safe and feasible decisions. Furthermore, we have developed a distributed consensus-based optimization approach to train the agents' policy functions while maintaining MGs' privacy and data ownership boundaries. After training, the learned optimal policy functions can be safely used by the MGs to dispatch their local resources, without the need to solve a complex optimization problem from scratch. Numerical experiments have been devised to verify the performance of the proposed method.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tsg.2020.3034827

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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 model-free control framework allows topology changes and promotes continuous operation of the system in faulty conditions, proving beneficial despite lower performance in dynamics and disturbances.

    “A model-free control framework [81] allows topology changes and promotes continuous operation of the system in faulty conditions, proving to be beneficial despite of lower performance in terms of dynamics and disturbances.”

    From Space Microgrids for Future Manned Lunar Bases: A Review (2021) · cites this paper as [81]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhang, Q., Dehghanpour, K., Wang, Z., Qiu, F., & Zhao, D.
Affiliations
  • Iowa State University (US)
  • Argonne National Laboratory (US)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid
Published
2021-03
Volume
12
Issue
2
Pages
1048-1062
ISSN
  • 1949-3053 (ISSN-L)
  • 1949-3061
OpenAlex
W3097422301
Cited by
137
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 45 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2
FWCI
9.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Energy Wind Energy Technologies Office (DE-EE0008956)
  • National Science Foundation Grant (ECCS 1929975)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Microgrid Control and Optimization
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Optimal Power Flow Distribution
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Smart Grid Energy Management
Keywords
multi-agent reinforcement learning, networked microgrids, power management, distribution systems, operational constraints, AC power flow, privacy preservation, data ownership

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