pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.19136 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-21 · 📡 eess.SY · cs.SY

A Constrained Formulation for Simultaneous Line Parameter Estimation and Instrument Transformer Calibration

Antos Cheeramban Varghese , Rajasekhar Anguluri , Anamitra Pal This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 02:19 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SY cs.SY
keywords line parameter estimationinstrument transformer calibrationphasor measurement unitsconstrained optimizationpower system monitoringPMU datajoint estimation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Power system domain knowledge cast as constraints breaks the mutual dependency between line parameter estimation and instrument transformer calibration from PMU data.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper identifies a circular dependency: calibrating instrument transformers with phasor measurement unit data requires known line parameters, while estimating those parameters requires calibrated transformers. It introduces a constrained optimization approach that embeds standard power system relationships directly into the problem to solve both tasks simultaneously. This removes the need for separate hardware or offline procedures. The method is shown to work on simulated cases, real field measurements, and a downstream power system application that uses the resulting values.

Core claim

A constrained formulation incorporates power system domain knowledge to perform simultaneous line parameter estimation and instrument transformer calibration from phasor measurement unit data, eliminating the interdependency that previously required one to be known before the other could be obtained.

What carries the argument

The constrained optimization framework that encodes power system domain knowledge directly as equality and inequality constraints on the joint estimation variables.

If this is right

  • Calibration of instrument transformers becomes possible without prior knowledge of line parameters or taking equipment out of service.
  • Line parameter estimates become available even when instrument transformers are initially uncalibrated.
  • The resulting values can be fed directly into power system applications that combine phasor measurement unit data with line parameters.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same constraint-based idea could be tested on other interdependent sensor and model estimation tasks in power systems, such as joint topology and parameter identification.
  • If the constraints remain effective on larger networks, the approach might reduce the frequency of periodic manual calibrations across entire grids.
  • Extension to streaming data would require checking whether the constraints still hold under time-varying operating conditions not examined in the reported tests.

Load-bearing premise

Power system domain knowledge can be expressed as constraints that resolve the circular dependency without requiring extra assumptions or introducing large errors in the resulting estimates.

What would settle it

If the joint estimates obtained from the constrained method deviate substantially from independently verified line parameters and calibration factors on the same data set, the claim that the constraints break the interdependency without significant error would be falsified.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.19136 by Anamitra Pal, Antos Cheeramban Varghese, Rajasekhar Anguluri.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: π-model of a transmission line used for explaining the proposed solution to the SLIC problem 1RQMs are high quality ITs that are typically present at critical points in the power system where ownership of electricity changes hands, or where precise billing and financial settlement are required. A likely location where RQMs exist in a modern transmission system are the ends of the tie-lines that connect one… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: π-model of two transmission lines connected to bus q the composite noise model (see Section II) to express V ∗ q in two ways as shown below: V ∗ q = αqp(Vqp − ∆Vqp) V ∗ q = αqs(Vqs − ∆Vqs). (19) Now, we define the variable ρpqs: ρpqs = (Vqp − ∆Vqp) (Vqs − ∆Vqs) = αqs αqp . (20) where ρpqs is the ratio of the correction factors of the VTs located at the q-end of branches p-q and q-s. An estimate of ρpqs, de… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Branches of the connected tree (in black) joining RQM branch to current branch; the lines in gray are not part of the connected tree Then, the correction factors for (u, u+1) is computed using Λ and the CFRs of every line segment in between (u, u + 1) and the RQM branch (1, 2) as shown below: αˆ(u,u+1) = Λ, αˆ(u+1,u) = Λ αˆ(u+1,u) αˆ(u,u+1) βˆ (u,u+1) = Λ βˆ (u,u+1) αˆ(u,u+1) , βˆ (u+1,u) = Λ βˆ (u+1,u) αˆ… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Evaluation of line parameter and IT correction factor (CF) estimates in the ideal case (perfect RQM and no additive noise) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Evaluation of line parameter estimates in presence of a perfect RQM pair but with additive PMU noise [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Accuracy of IT correction factor (CF) - magnitude, in presence [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Accuracy of IT correction factor (CF) - angle, in presence of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Evaluation of line parameter estimates in presence of a non-ideal RQM pair and additive PMU noise [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Accuracy of IT correction factor (CF) - magnitude, in presence [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Accuracy of IT correction factor (CF) - angle, in presence [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Comparison of LPE errors in % between the approach developed in Wang et al. [17] and NET-SLIC TABLE IV: Line parameter estimates (in p.u.) obtained using NET-SLIC with real PMU data Resistance Reactance Susceptance 8 AM–11 AM 3 PM–6 PM 8 AM–11 AM 3 PM–6 PM 8 AM–11 AM 3 PM–6 PM Estimated Monday 0.0036 0.0037 0.0262 0.0262 0.0046 0.0045 Tuesday 0.0036 0.0041 0.0261 0.0259 0.0047 0.0046 Wednesday 0.0036 0.00… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Voltage magnitude measurements before and after calibration [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Improvements in estimating states of the 345 kV network of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_15.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The process of calibrating instrument transformers (ITs) has been greatly simplified by using phasor measurement unit (PMU) data since this process eliminates the need for (a) additional hardware, and (b) taking ITs offline. However, such simplification comes at the cost of knowing the line parameters, whose estimation using PMU data in turn requires calibrated ITs. To solve this interdependency problem, we propose a novel framework that incorporates power system domain knowledge as constraints to perform simultaneous line parameter estimation and IT calibration. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach with simulated and real PMU data as well as for a power system application that uses both PMU data and line parameter information.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a constrained optimization framework that incorporates power system domain knowledge to jointly estimate transmission line parameters and calibrate instrument transformers (ITs) from PMU measurements. This addresses the circular dependency where line parameter estimation requires calibrated ITs and vice versa. The approach is validated through simulations, real PMU data, and demonstrated in a power system application that relies on both PMU data and line parameters.

Significance. If the domain-knowledge constraints prove sufficient to ensure identifiability without introducing substantial bias, the work could enable more accurate and practical deployment of PMU-based monitoring, protection, and estimation applications without requiring separate calibration hardware or offline procedures. The inclusion of real-data validation and an end-use application strengthens the practical relevance.

minor comments (3)
  1. The abstract states that the method is demonstrated with simulated and real PMU data, but the results section would benefit from explicit reporting of estimation errors, convergence behavior, and sensitivity to constraint tightness (e.g., via tables or figures showing bias introduced by the chosen constraints).
  2. Notation for the constraint set and the optimization variables (IT ratio/phase errors and line parameters) should be introduced earlier and used consistently to improve readability for readers outside the immediate subfield.
  3. The power-system application example would be strengthened by a quantitative comparison against a baseline that performs sequential estimation (first calibrate ITs assuming nominal line parameters, then estimate parameters).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive summary of our work and the recommendation for minor revision. The referee's description accurately reflects the core contribution of our constrained optimization approach that resolves the circular dependency between line parameter estimation and instrument transformer calibration using PMU data.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected; derivation relies on independent domain-knowledge constraints

full rationale

The paper explicitly identifies the mutual dependency between line parameter estimation and IT calibration from PMU data, then resolves it by formulating established power system domain knowledge (e.g., physical laws and network properties) as explicit constraints within a joint optimization. No equations or steps in the provided abstract reduce a claimed prediction or result to a fitted parameter or self-citation by construction. The constraints are drawn from external, standard power-system principles rather than being defined in terms of the target estimates themselves, rendering the framework self-contained and non-circular. Without load-bearing self-citations or ansatz smuggling visible in the abstract, the central claim stands on independent content.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract provides insufficient detail to specify free parameters, axioms, or invented entities. The method relies on power system domain knowledge encoded as constraints.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5423 in / 1046 out tokens · 47552 ms · 2026-05-10T02:19:21.001009+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

28 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    A. G. Phadke and J. S. Thorp,Synchronized Phasor Measurements and Their Applications, 2nd ed. Springer, 2017, ch. 7

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    IEEE/IEC International Standard - Measuring Relays and Protection Equipment - Part 118-1: Synchrophasor for Power Systems - Measurements,

    IEC/IEEE, “IEEE/IEC International Standard - Measuring Relays and Protection Equipment - Part 118-1: Synchrophasor for Power Systems - Measurements,”IEC/IEEE 60255-118-1:2018, pp. 1–78, 2018

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    A simple method for the calibration of traditional and electronic measurement current and voltage transformers,

    A. Brandolini, M. Faifer, and R. Ottoboni, “A simple method for the calibration of traditional and electronic measurement current and voltage transformers,”IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 58, no. 5, pp. 1345–1353, 2009

    work page 2009

  4. [4]

    Industrial comparator for smart grid sensor calibration,

    G. Crotti, D. Gallo, D. Giordano, C. Landi, and M. Luiso, “Industrial comparator for smart grid sensor calibration,”IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 17, no. 23, pp. 7784–7793, 2017

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    A computer-controlled calibrator for instrument transformer test sets,

    S. Siegenthaler and C. Mester, “A computer-controlled calibrator for instrument transformer test sets,”IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 66, no. 6, pp. 1184–1190, 2017

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    Online calibra- tion of voltage transformers using synchrophasor measurements,

    A. Pal, P. Chatterjee, J. S. Thorp, and V . A. Centeno, “Online calibra- tion of voltage transformers using synchrophasor measurements,”IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 370–380, 2015

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    An adaptive method for detection and correction of errors in PMU measurements,

    D. Shi, D. J. Tylavsky, and N. Logic, “An adaptive method for detection and correction of errors in PMU measurements,”IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 1575–1583, 2012

    work page 2012

  8. [8]

    Calibrating instrument transformers with phasor measurements,

    M. Zhou, V . Centeno, J. S. Thorp, and A. G. Phadke, “Calibrating instrument transformers with phasor measurements,”Electric Power Components and Systems, vol. 40, no. 14, pp. 1605–1620, 2012

    work page 2012

  9. [9]

    Error reduction of phasor measurement unit data considering practical constraints,

    P. Chatterjee, A. Pal, J. S. Thorp, J. De La Ree Lopez, and V . A. Centeno, “Error reduction of phasor measurement unit data considering practical constraints,”IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution, vol. 12, no. 10, pp. 2332–2339, 2018

    work page 2018

  10. [10]

    Parameter estimation of three-phase untransposed short transmission lines from synchrophasor measurements,

    A. Wehenkel, A. Mukhopadhyay, J.-Y . Le Boudec, and M. Paolone, “Parameter estimation of three-phase untransposed short transmission lines from synchrophasor measurements,”IEEE Transactions on Instru- mentation and Measurement, vol. 69, no. 9, pp. 6143–6154, 2020

    work page 2020

  11. [11]

    Transmission line parameter estimation under non-Gaussian measurement noise,

    A. C. Varghese, A. Pal, and G. Dasarathy, “Transmission line parameter estimation under non-Gaussian measurement noise,”IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 3147–3162, 2023

    work page 2023

  12. [12]

    Compound admittance matrix estimation of three-phase untransposed power distri- bution grids using synchrophasor measurements,

    R. K. Gupta, F. Sossan, J.-Y . Le Boudec, and M. Paolone, “Compound admittance matrix estimation of three-phase untransposed power distri- bution grids using synchrophasor measurements,”IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 70, pp. 1–13, 2021

    work page 2021

  13. [13]

    Comparative analysis of information theoretic and statistical methods for line parameter esti- mation,

    A. Sharma, A. C. Varghese, and A. Pal, “Comparative analysis of information theoretic and statistical methods for line parameter esti- mation,” in2024 International Conference on Smart Grid Synchronized Measurements and Analytics (SGSMA). IEEE, 2024, pp. 1–6

    work page 2024

  14. [14]

    Simultaneous transmission line parameter and PMU measurement calibration,

    Z. Wu, L. T. Zora, and A. G. Phadke, “Simultaneous transmission line parameter and PMU measurement calibration,” in2015 IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting. IEEE, 2015, pp. 1–5

    work page 2015

  15. [15]

    Detection and correction of systematic errors in instrument transformers along with line parameter estimation using PMU data,

    K. V . Khandeparkar, S. A. Soman, and G. Gajjar, “Detection and correction of systematic errors in instrument transformers along with line parameter estimation using PMU data,”IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 3089–3098, 2016

    work page 2016

  16. [16]

    Instrument transformer calibration and robust estimation of transmission line parameters using PMU measurements,

    H. Goklani, G. Gajjar, and S. Soman, “Instrument transformer calibration and robust estimation of transmission line parameters using PMU measurements,”IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 1761–1770, 2020

    work page 2020

  17. [17]

    Transmission lines positive sequence parameters estimation and instrument transformers calibration based on PMU measurement error model,

    C. Wang, V . A. Centeno, K. D. Jones, and D. Yang, “Transmission lines positive sequence parameters estimation and instrument transformers calibration based on PMU measurement error model,”IEEE Access, vol. 7, pp. 145 104–145 117, 2019

    work page 2019

  18. [18]

    Calibrating CVTs of a substation from local PMU data: An SVD approach,

    P. Gupta and S. A. Soman, “Calibrating CVTs of a substation from local PMU data: An SVD approach,”IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 3362–3371, 2021

    work page 2021

  19. [19]

    Three phase current transformer calibration without external reference IT using synchrophasors: An SVD approach,

    P. Gupta and S. A. Soman, “Three phase current transformer calibration without external reference IT using synchrophasors: An SVD approach,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 2111–2119, 2023

    work page 2023

  20. [20]

    System-wide instrument transformer calibra- tion and line parameter estimation using PMU data,

    A. C. Varghese and A. Pal, “System-wide instrument transformer calibra- tion and line parameter estimation using PMU data,”IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, pp. 1–13, 2025

    work page 2025

  21. [21]

    IEEE Standard Requirements for Instrument Transformers,

    IEEE, “IEEE Standard Requirements for Instrument Transformers,” IEEE Std C57.13-2016 (Revision of IEEE Std C57.13-2008), pp. 1–96, 2016

    work page 2016

  22. [22]

    Combining steady- state accuracy and responsiveness of PMU estimates: An approach based on left and right Taylor–Fourier expansions,

    G. Frigo, G. Gallus, P. A. Pegoraro, and S. Toscani, “Combining steady- state accuracy and responsiveness of PMU estimates: An approach based on left and right Taylor–Fourier expansions,”IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 73, pp. 1–13, 2024

    work page 2024

  23. [23]

    Deep neural network-based state estimator for transmission system considering practical implementation challenges,

    A. C. Varghese, H. Shah, B. Azimian, A. Pal, and E. Farantatos, “Deep neural network-based state estimator for transmission system considering practical implementation challenges,”Journal of Modern Power Systems and Clean Energy, 2024

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    Overview of total least-squares methods,

    I. Markovsky and S. Van Huffel, “Overview of total least-squares methods,”Signal Processing, vol. 87, no. 10, pp. 2283–2302, 2007

    work page 2007

  25. [25]

    Recent advances in trust region algorithms,

    Y .-x. Yuan, “Recent advances in trust region algorithms,”Mathematical Programming, vol. 151, no. 1, pp. 249–281, 2015

    work page 2015

  26. [26]

    Dynamic state prediction based on auto-regressive (AR) model using PMU data,

    F. Gao, J. S. Thorp, A. Pal, and S. Gao, “Dynamic state prediction based on auto-regressive (AR) model using PMU data,” in2012 IEEE Power and Energy Conference at Illinois, 2012, pp. 1–5

    work page 2012

  27. [27]

    PMU-based estimation of systematic measurement errors, line parameters, and tap changer ratios in three-phase power systems,

    P. A. Pegoraro, C. Sitzia, A. V . Solinas, and S. Sulis, “PMU-based estimation of systematic measurement errors, line parameters, and tap changer ratios in three-phase power systems,”IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 71, pp. 1–12, 2022

    work page 2022

  28. [28]

    A PMU placement scheme ensuring real-time monitoring of critical buses of the network,

    A. Pal, G. A. Sanchez-Ayala, V . A. Centeno, and J. S. Thorp, “A PMU placement scheme ensuring real-time monitoring of critical buses of the network,”IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 510–517, 2014

    work page 2014