skip to main content
10.1145/3447555.3464864acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagese-energyConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Solving the Dynamics-Aware Economic Dispatch Problem with the Koopman Operator

Authors Info & Claims
Published:22 June 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

The dynamics-aware economic dispatch (DED) problem embeds low-level generator dynamics and operational constraints to enable near real-time scheduling of generation units in a power network. DED produces a more dynamic supervisory control policy than traditional economic dispatch (T-ED) that reduces overall generation costs. However, in contrast to T-ED, DED is a nonlinear, non-convex optimization problem that is computationally prohibitive to solve. We introduce a machine learning-based operator-theoretic approach for solving the DED problem efficiently. Specifically, we develop a novel discrete-time Koopman Operator (KO) formulation that embeds domain information into the structure of the KO to learn high-fidelity approximations of the generator dynamics. Using the KO approximation, the DED problem can be reformulated as a computationally tractable linear program (abbreviated DED-KO). We demonstrate the high solution quality and computational-time savings of the DED-KO model over the original DED formulation on a 9-bus test system.

References

  1. Aristotle Arapostathis, S. Shank Sastry, and Varaiya Pravin. 1982. Global Analysis of Swing Dynamics. IEEE Transaction on Circuits and Systems 29, 10 (1982), 673--678. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCS.1982.1085086Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Hassan Arbabi, Milan Korda, and Igor Mezić. 2018. A data-driven Koopman model predictive control framework for nonlinear flows. arXiv preprint arXiv:1804.05291 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Craig Bakker, Arnab Bhattacharya, Samrat Chatterjee, Matthew R Oster, Casey J Perkins, and Feng Pan. [n.d.]. Solvability, Operability, and Security for Cyber-Physical Systems: New Computational Methods with Revised Assumptions. In Journal of Information Warfare. JIW, [Accepted].Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Craig Bakker, Arnab Bhattacharya, Samrat Chatterjee, Casey J Perkins, and Matthew R Oster. 2020. The Koopman Operator: Capabilities and Recent Advances. In 2020 Resilience Week (RWS). IEEE, 34--40.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Craig Bakker, Kathleen E Nowak, and W Steven Rosenthal. 2019. Learning Koopman Operators for Systems with Isolated Critical Points. In 2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC). IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Craig Bakker, W Steven Rosenthal, and Kathleen E Nowak. 2019. Koopman Representations of Dynamic Systems with Control. arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.02233 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Steven L Brunton, Bingni W Brunton, Joshua L Proctor, and J Nathan Kutz. 2016. Koopman invariant subspaces and finite linear representations of nonlinear dynamical systems for control. PloS one 11, 2 (2016), e0150171.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Marko Budišić, Ryan Mohr, and Igor Mezić. 2012. Applied koopmanism. Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science 22, 4 (2012), 047510.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. P. Chakraborty, S. Dhople, C. Yu Chen, and M. Parvania. 2020. Dynamics-aware Continuous-time Economic Dispatch and Optimal Automatic Generation Control. In 2020 American Control Conference (ACC). 1292--1298. https://doi.org/10.23919/ACC45564.2020.9147860Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Joe H. Chow, Kwok W. Cheung, and Graham Rogers. [n.d.]. Power System Toolbox. Retrieved September 2020 from https://www.ecse.rpi.edu/~chowj/PST_2020_Aug_10.zipGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. H. Chávez, R. Baldick, and S. Sharma. 2014. Governor Rate-Constrained OPF for Primary Frequency Control Adequacy. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 29, 3 (2014), 1473--1480. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2014.2298838Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. William Ford. 2014. Numerical Linear Algebra with Applications. Elsevier Inc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Sören Hanke, Sebastian Peitz, Oliver Wallscheid, Stefan Klus, Joachim Böcker, and Michael Dellnitz. 2018. Koopman operator based finite-set model predictive control for electrical drives. arXiv preprint arXiv:1804.00854 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. William E. Hart, Carl D. Laird, Jean-Paul Watson, David L. Woodruff, Gabriel A. Hackebeil, Bethany L. Nicholson, and John D. Siirola. 2017. Pyomo-optimization modeling in python (second ed.). Vol. 67. Springer Science & Business Media.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. William E Hart, Jean-Paul Watson, and David L Woodruff. 2011. Pyomo: modeling and solving mathematical programs in Python. Mathematical Programming Computation 3, 3 (2011), 219--260.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Bowen Huang, Xu Ma, and Umesh Vaidya. 2020. Data-driven nonlinear stabilization using koopman operator. In The Koopman Operator in Systems and Control. Springer, 313--334.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. M. Karrari and O.P. Malik. 2004. Identification of Physical Parameters of a Synchronous Generator From Online Measurements. IEEE Transactions On Energy Conversion 19, 2 (2004), 407--415.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Roohallah Khatami, Masood Parvania, Swaroop Guggilam, Christine Chen, and Sairaj Dhople. 2020. Dynamics-aware Continuous-time Economic Dispatch: A Solution for Optimal Frequency Regulation. In Proceedings of the 53rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Honolulu, HI, 3186--3195. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2020.388Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. B.J. Kirby, C. Martinez, J. Dyer, A. Shoureshi, D. Rahmat, J. Dagle, and R. Guttromson. 2002. Frequency Control Concerns In The North American Electric Power System. Technical Report. Oak Ridge National Laboratory.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Milan Korda and Igor Mezic. 2018. Linear predictors for nonlinear dynamical systems: Koopman operator meets model predictive control. Automatica 93 (2018), 149--160.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Y. Lee and R. Baldick. 2013. A Frequency-Constrained Stochastic Economic Dispatch Model. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 28, 3 (2013), 2301--2312. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2012.2236108Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. N. Li, C. Zhao, and L. Chen. 2016. Connecting Automatic Generation Control and Economic Dispatch From an Optimization View. IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems 3, 3 (2016), 254--264. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCNS.2015.2459451Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. F. Milano, F. Dörfler, G. Hug, D. J. Hill, and G. Verbič. 2018. Foundations and Challenges of Low-Inertia Systems (Invited Paper). In 2018 Power Systems Computation Conference (PSCC). 1--25. https://doi.org/10.23919/PSCC.2018.8450880Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. E. Mouni, S. Tnani, and G. Champenois. 2006. Comparative study of three modelling methods of synchronous generator. In IECON 2006 - 32nd Annual Conference on IEEE Industrial Electronics. 1551--1556. https://doi.org/10.1109/IECON.2006.347987Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Bethany Nicholson, John D. Siirola, Jean-Paul Watson, Victor M. Zavala, and Lorenz T. Biegler. 2018. pyomo.dae: a modeling and automatic discretization framework for optimization with differential and algebraic equations. Mathematical Programming Computation 10, 2 (2018), 187--223.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. M. Oster, S. Chatterjee, F. Pan, C. Bakker, A. Bhattacharya, and C. Perkins. 2020. Power system resilience through defender-attacker-defender models with uncertainty: an overview. In 2020 Resilience Week (RWS). 11--17. https://doi.org/10.1109/RWS50334.2020.9241279Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Samuel E Otto and Clarence W Rowley. 2019. Linearly recurrent autoencoder networks for learning dynamics. SIAM Journal on Applied Dynamical Systems 18, 1 (2019), 558--593.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Sebastian Peitz and Stefan Klus. 2019. Koopman operator-based model reduction for switched-system control of PDEs. Automatica 106 (2019), 184--191.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. A. A. Thatte, Fan Zhang, and L. Xie. 2011. Frequency aware economic dispatch. In 2011 North American Power Symposium. 1--7. https://doi.org/10.1109/NAPS.2011.6025191Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. The Mathworks, Inc. 2017. MATLAB version 9.7.0.1296695 (R2019b). The Mathworks, Inc., Natick, Massachusetts.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Sebastian Trip, Mathias Bürger, and Claudio De Persis. 2016. An internal model approach to (optimal) frequency regulation in power grids with time-varying voltages. Automatica 64 (2016), 240--253.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. A. Wächter and L.T. Biegler. 2006. On the implementation of a primal-dual interior point filter line search algorithm for large-scale nonlinear programming. Mathematical Programming 106, 1 (2006), 25--57.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Y. Wen, W. Li, G. Huang, and X. Liu. 2016. Frequency Dynamics Constrained Unit Commitment With Battery Energy Storage. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems 31, 6 (2016), 5115--5125. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2016.2521882Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Matthew O Williams, Ioannis G Kevrekidis, and Clarence W Rowley. 2015. A data-driven approximation of the koopman operator: Extending dynamic mode decomposition. Journal of Nonlinear Science 25, 6 (2015), 1307--1346.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. A.J. Wood, B.F. Wollenberg, and G.B Shebl'e. 2013. Power Generation, Operation, and Control (3rd edition). John Wiley, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Enoch Yeung, Soumya Kundu, and Nathan Hodas. 2017. Learning deep neural network representations for Koopman operators of nonlinear dynamical systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.06850 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Solving the Dynamics-Aware Economic Dispatch Problem with the Koopman Operator

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Other conferences
          e-Energy '21: Proceedings of the Twelfth ACM International Conference on Future Energy Systems
          June 2021
          528 pages
          ISBN:9781450383332
          DOI:10.1145/3447555

          Copyright © 2021 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 22 June 2021

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed limited

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate160of446submissions,36%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader