pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.17487 · v1 · pith:WQFMWD66new · submitted 2026-05-17 · 🧮 math.OC

Port-Hamiltonian Control and Structure-Preserving Algorithm for Grid-Forming SVGs

Jiaxin Qian , Feng Ji , Sixu Wu , Mingyang Liu , Yifa Tang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 22:43 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.OC
keywords port-Hamiltonian modelinggrid-forming controlstatic var generatorinput-to-state stabilitystructure-preserving simulationmidpoint ruleenergy conservation
0
0 comments X

The pith

A port-Hamiltonian model yields an input-to-state stable controller and an energy-exact midpoint integrator for grid-forming static var generators.

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

The paper builds a port-Hamiltonian model of grid-forming static var generators that tracks energy flows through the inductor, capacitor, and DC-link ports. From this model it derives an input-to-state stable controller that drives states toward zero despite disturbances using only three tunable parameters with physical meaning. It also supplies a Dirac-structure-preserving midpoint discretization that conserves the Hamiltonian exactly when disturbances vanish. Simulations indicate faster settling, smaller offsets, and lower effort than a standard PI controller, together with exact energy conservation and improved long-term accuracy versus ordinary Runge-Kutta integrators. Readers care because SVGs are essential for voltage support in modern grids, and these tools offer a systematic route to more reliable control and simulation.

Core claim

By casting the SVG in port-Hamiltonian form that encodes energy exchange among its storage ports, the authors obtain an ISS controller that steers subsystem states to zero while attenuating the effect of external disturbances, and a Dirac-structure-preserving midpoint rule that exactly conserves the system Hamiltonian whenever disturbances are absent.

What carries the argument

The port-Hamiltonian formulation of SVG dynamics that encodes energy exchange via a Dirac structure; the three-parameter ISS controller; and the structure-preserving midpoint rule that inherits exact energy conservation from the continuous-time model.

If this is right

  • The ISS controller achieves faster settling, smaller steady-state offset, and lower control effort than a conventional PI controller.
  • The midpoint rule maintains exact Hamiltonian conservation and delivers superior long-term accuracy compared with standard Runge-Kutta methods.
  • The controller design uses only three parameters with direct physical interpretations and remains robust to input errors.
  • Exact energy conservation holds for the discrete-time model precisely when external disturbances are absent.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same modeling and discretization approach could be applied to other voltage-source converters to obtain consistent energy-based controllers.
  • Hardware realization of the midpoint rule might support accurate real-time digital twins for SVG performance monitoring.
  • The low-parameter ISS design may simplify field tuning of SVGs compared with higher-order or purely model-based alternatives.
  • Extension to networks containing multiple SVGs could reveal how the method scales for coordinated reactive-power support.

Load-bearing premise

The port-Hamiltonian model is assumed to capture all relevant energy exchanges and dynamics of the SVG under the operating conditions of interest.

What would settle it

A laboratory test of a physical grid-forming SVG in which the ISS controller fails to reduce settling time relative to PI control, or in which the midpoint simulation loses exact energy conservation when realistic disturbances or parameter drift are present.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.17487 by Feng Ji, Jiaxin Qian, Mingyang Liu, Sixu Wu, Yifa Tang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The comparison of two controllers as d = 0. 16 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The comparison of two controllers as d =  cos 2t sin 2t  . 5.2 Comparison of Different Algorithms We now compare two algorithms with the same truncation error O(h 3 ) on the system d dt       x1 x2 x3 x4 x5       =       0 1 −1 0 0 −1 0 0 −1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 −1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0             x1 x2 x3 x4 x5       +       1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 −x1 −x2        u1 u2  . (… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: shows the comparison. The Dirac‑structure‑preserving mid￾point method exactly conserves the Hamiltonian energy H when d = 0, i.e., H(xk+1) = H(xk) for all steps, whereas the Runge‑Kutta method ex￾hibits a small but steadily growing energy drift. Furthermore, the error of the preserving algorithm is insensitive to the magnitude of the control in￾put u: even when ||u|| is large, the energy error remains exac… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This paper presents a port-Hamiltonian (PH) modeling, control, and structure-preserving simulation framework for grid-forming static var generators (SVGs). A PH model is established that captures energy exchange among the inductor, capacitor, and DC-link storage ports. Since external disturbances cannot be fully canceled by feedback, an input-to-state stable (ISS) controller is designed to steer subsystem states to zero while minimizing disturbance effects. The controller contains only three tunable parameters with clear physical interpretations and is robust against input errors. A Dirac-structure-preserving midpoint rule is developed, which exactly conserves the Hamiltonian energy when disturbances are absent. Numerical comparisons show that the ISS controller achieves faster settling, smaller offset, and lower control effort than a conventional PI controller, and the structure-preserving midpoint rule maintains exact energy conservation and superior long-term accuracy over standard Runge-Kutta methods.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. This paper develops a port-Hamiltonian (PH) model for grid-forming static var generators (SVGs) capturing energy exchange among inductor, capacitor, and DC-link ports. It designs an input-to-state stable (ISS) controller using three tunable parameters with physical interpretations that is robust to input errors, and proposes a Dirac-structure-preserving midpoint integration rule that exactly conserves the Hamiltonian when disturbances are absent. Numerical comparisons demonstrate that the ISS controller achieves faster settling, smaller steady-state offset, and lower control effort than a conventional PI controller, while the midpoint rule maintains exact energy conservation and superior long-term accuracy over standard Runge-Kutta methods.

Significance. If the results hold under the stated modeling assumptions, the work offers a structure-preserving approach to SVG control and simulation that leverages port-Hamiltonian properties for energy conservation and disturbance handling. The exact conservation property of the midpoint rule and the physically interpretable parameters are notable strengths that could support more reliable grid-forming inverter designs in power systems applications.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3 (Controller design)] §3 (Controller design): The manuscript establishes the ISS property for the closed-loop system but provides no analytic stability margins or explicit robustness bounds beyond the basic ISS guarantee. This creates a derivation gap for the central performance claims, as the reported numerical superiority over PI control relies on post-hoc tuning of the three parameters without derived margins that would hold under the operating conditions of interest.
  2. [§5 (Numerical results)] §5 (Numerical results): The comparisons report faster settling, smaller offset, and lower effort, yet the evaluation is conducted entirely within the three-port PH model without tests for model mismatch (e.g., switching harmonics or grid impedance dynamics not captured by the Dirac structure). This directly affects transferability of the strongest claims, as the ISS guarantees and exact conservation property lose their foundation if unmodeled dynamics violate the port-Hamiltonian assumption.
  3. [§4 (Discretization)] §4 (Discretization): While the midpoint rule is shown to conserve the Hamiltonian exactly in the disturbance-free case via the Dirac structure, the paper does not analyze how this property interacts with the ISS controller under nonzero disturbances or parameter variations, leaving the long-term accuracy advantage dependent on simulation-specific conditions rather than a general guarantee.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The statement on robustness to input errors could be clarified by briefly indicating the nature of the errors considered (e.g., measurement or actuation) to better align with the ISS design.
  2. [Notation] Notation: Ensure that the Hamiltonian function and port variables are defined consistently between the modeling section and the controller equations to avoid ambiguity in the energy-balance interpretation.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, providing clarifications on the scope of our theoretical results and indicating revisions that will strengthen the presentation without misrepresenting the contributions.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§3 (Controller design)] The manuscript establishes the ISS property for the closed-loop system but provides no analytic stability margins or explicit robustness bounds beyond the basic ISS guarantee. This creates a derivation gap for the central performance claims, as the reported numerical superiority over PI control relies on post-hoc tuning of the three parameters without derived margins that would hold under the operating conditions of interest.

    Authors: The ISS property guarantees bounded states for bounded disturbances, with the bound modulated by the three physically interpretable parameters (corresponding to damping, stiffness, and gain). While explicit analytic margins such as ultimate bounds or ISS gains are not derived in closed form, the parameter interpretations enable practical tuning for desired performance. The numerical results use representative values to illustrate advantages over PI control. To close the noted gap, we will add a brief discussion in Section 3 on the influence of each parameter on the ISS gain and supply tuning guidelines based on desired settling and robustness specifications. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [§5 (Numerical results)] The comparisons report faster settling, smaller offset, and lower effort, yet the evaluation is conducted entirely within the three-port PH model without tests for model mismatch (e.g., switching harmonics or grid impedance dynamics not captured by the Dirac structure). This directly affects transferability of the strongest claims, as the ISS guarantees and exact conservation property lose their foundation if unmodeled dynamics violate the port-Hamiltonian assumption.

    Authors: All reported simulations are performed under the exact three-port port-Hamiltonian model with its stated assumptions. We have not included explicit tests with unmodeled effects such as switching harmonics or additional grid impedance. This is a valid limitation for broad transferability claims. In the revision we will expand the discussion in Section 5 to state the modeling assumptions explicitly, discuss their implications for real-world applicability, and note that the ISS controller remains robust to disturbances within the modeled ports. If space allows, we will include one supplementary simulation with added harmonic content to illustrate retained advantages. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [§4 (Discretization)] While the midpoint rule is shown to conserve the Hamiltonian exactly in the disturbance-free case via the Dirac structure, the paper does not analyze how this property interacts with the ISS controller under nonzero disturbances or parameter variations, leaving the long-term accuracy advantage dependent on simulation-specific conditions rather than a general guarantee.

    Authors: Exact Hamiltonian conservation holds only when disturbances are absent, because disturbances represent external energy exchange that the Dirac-structure preservation cannot cancel. Under nonzero disturbances the integrator still minimizes artificial dissipation relative to standard methods. We will revise Section 4 to add a remark clarifying this interaction with the ISS controller, showing that the structure-preserving property continues to yield superior long-term accuracy for small-to-moderate disturbances while the ISS controller attenuates their effect on the states. This provides a more complete description of behavior under the operating conditions considered in the paper. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: derivations follow from PH structure and standard integrator properties

full rationale

The paper derives the ISS controller from the three-port PH model and input-to-state stability requirements, with parameters having explicit physical meanings. The midpoint rule's exact conservation follows directly from preservation of the Dirac structure, a standard property of geometric integrators on PH systems. Neither the controller design nor the conservation claim reduces by the paper's equations to a fitted quantity or self-referential input. Numerical comparisons serve as validation only. The model-fidelity assumption is an external modeling choice, not a circular step within the derivation chain.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on the assumption that the SVG dynamics admit a port-Hamiltonian representation with a well-defined Dirac structure; the three controller parameters are introduced as tunable but physically interpretable quantities without independent calibration data shown in the abstract.

free parameters (1)
  • three tunable controller parameters
    Explicitly introduced as the only adjustable knobs in the ISS controller; their values are chosen for performance but not derived from first principles.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption SVG dynamics can be exactly represented as a port-Hamiltonian system whose ports correspond to inductor, capacitor, and DC-link storage.
    Invoked at the start of the modeling section to establish energy exchange structure.
  • domain assumption External disturbances cannot be fully canceled by state feedback.
    Stated as the reason for adopting an ISS rather than a canceling controller.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5685 in / 1551 out tokens · 36193 ms · 2026-05-19T22:43:58.349292+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

25 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Ordinary differential equations

    Vladimir I Arnold. Ordinary differential equations. Springer Science & Business Media, 1992

    work page 1992

  2. [2]

    Distributed power-generation systems and protection

    Frede Blaabjerg, Yongheng Yang, Dongsheng Yang, and Xiongfei Wang. Distributed power-generation systems and protection. Proceedings of the IEEE, 105(7):1311–1331, 2017. doi:10.1109/JPROC.2017.2696878

    work page doi:10.1109/jproc.2017.2696878 2017

  3. [3]

    On difference schemes and symplectic geometry

    Kang Feng. On difference schemes and symplectic geometry. In Pro- ceedings of the 5th international symposium on differential geometry and differential equations , 1984

    work page 1984

  4. [4]

    Collected Works of Feng Kang

    Kang Feng. Collected Works of Feng Kang . Science Press, Beijing, second edition, July 2020

    work page 2020

  5. [5]

    Geometric numerical integration

    Ernst Hairer, Marlis Hochbruck, Arieh Iserles, and Christian Lubich. Geometric numerical integration. Oberwolfach Reports, 8(1):825–900,

    work page

  6. [6]

    doi:10.4171/OWR/2006/14

    work page doi:10.4171/owr/2006/14 2006

  7. [7]

    Geometric Nu- merical Integration: Structure-Preserving Algorithms for Ordinary Dif- ferential Equations , volume 31 of Springer Series in Computational Mathematics

    Ernst Hairer, Christian Lubich, and Gerhard Wanner. Geometric Nu- merical Integration: Structure-Preserving Algorithms for Ordinary Dif- ferential Equations , volume 31 of Springer Series in Computational Mathematics. Springer, Berlin, second edition, 2006

    work page 2006

  8. [8]

    Control de- sign of passive grid-forming inverters in port-hamiltonian frame- work

    Le Kong, Yaosuo Xue, Liang Qiao, and Fei Wang. Control de- sign of passive grid-forming inverters in port-hamiltonian frame- work. IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics , 39(1):332–345, 2023. doi:10.1109/TPEL.2023.3319966

    work page doi:10.1109/tpel.2023.3319966 2023

  9. [9]

    Port-hamiltonian discontinuous galerkin finite element meth- ods

    Nishant Kumar, Jaap JW van der Vegt, and Hans J Zwart. Port-hamiltonian discontinuous galerkin finite element meth- ods. IMA Journal of Numerical Analysis , 45(1):354–403, 2025. doi:10.1093/imanum/drae008

    work page doi:10.1093/imanum/drae008 2025

  10. [10]

    Port-controlled hamiltonian systems: modelling origins and systemtheoretic properties

    Bernhard M Maschke and Arjan J van der Schaft. Port-controlled hamiltonian systems: modelling origins and systemtheoretic properties. In Nonlinear control systems design 1992, pages 359–365. Elsevier, 1993. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-041901-5.50064-6

    work page doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-041901-5.50064-6 1992

  11. [11]

    Structure-preserving dis- cretization for port-hamiltonian descriptor systems

    Volker Mehrmann and Riccardo Morandin. Structure-preserving dis- cretization for port-hamiltonian descriptor systems. In 2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC) , pages 6863–6868. IEEE,

    work page 2019

  12. [12]

    doi:10.1109/cdc40024.2019.9030180. 20

    work page doi:10.1109/cdc40024.2019.9030180 2019

  13. [13]

    Interconnection and damping assignment passivity-based con- trol of port-controlled hamiltonian systems.Automatica, 38(4):585–596,

    Romeo Ortega, Arjan Van Der Schaft, Bernhard Maschke, and Gerardo Escobar. Interconnection and damping assignment passivity-based con- trol of port-controlled hamiltonian systems.Automatica, 38(4):585–596,

    work page

  14. [14]

    doi:10.1016/S0005-1098(01)00278-3

    work page doi:10.1016/s0005-1098(01)00278-3

  15. [15]

    Grid-forming con- verters for renewable generation: A comprehensive review

    Muhammad Waqas Qaisar and Jingyang Fang. Grid-forming con- verters for renewable generation: A comprehensive review. Energies, 18(17):4565, 2025. doi:10.3390/en18174565

    work page doi:10.3390/en18174565 2025

  16. [16]

    Enhancing energy conserving methods

    Sebastian Reich. Enhancing energy conserving methods. BIT Numeri- cal Mathematics, 36(1):122–134, 1996. doi:10.1007/BF01740549

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01740549 1996

  17. [17]

    Smooth stabilization implies coprime factoriza- tion

    Eduardo D Sontag. Smooth stabilization implies coprime factoriza- tion. IEEE transactions on automatic control , 34(4):435–443, 1989. doi:10.1109/9.28018

    work page doi:10.1109/9.28018 1989

  18. [18]

    In Petyon Young & Shmuel Zamir, ed- itors: Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications, 4, Elsevier, pp

    Eduardo D Sontag and Yuan Wang. On characterizations of input- to-state stability with respect to compact sets. In Nonlinear control systems design 1995 , pages 203–208. Elsevier, 1995. doi:10.1016/B978- 0-08-042371-5.50039-3

    work page doi:10.1016/b978- 1995

  19. [19]

    Science Press, Bei- jing, March 2026

    Yifa Tang, Ruili Zhang, Beibei Zhu, Aiqing Zhu, and Sixu Wu.Geomet- ric Algorithms for Dynamical Systems with Applications (in Chinese) , volume 215 of Modern Mathematical Basic Series . Science Press, Bei- jing, March 2026

    work page 2026

  20. [20]

    Adaptive control method of grid-forming svg under non-ideal power grid condition

    Yufei Teng, Xi Wang, Peng Shi, Zhengwei Chang, Biao Wang, Xi Ye, Jiayu Bai, Lianshan Han, Tong Dai, Yuhong Wang, et al. Adaptive control method of grid-forming svg under non-ideal power grid condition. In 2024 IEEE 8th Conference on Energy Internet and Energy System Integration (EI2) , pages 3237–3241. IEEE, 2024. doi:10.1109/EI264398.2024.10991376

    work page doi:10.1109/ei264398.2024.10991376 2024

  21. [21]

    L2-gain and passivity techniques in nonlinear control

    Arjan Van der Schaft. L2-gain and passivity techniques in nonlinear control. Springer, 2000

    work page 2000

  22. [22]

    Port-hamiltonian modeling for control

    Arjan Van Der Schaft. Port-hamiltonian modeling for control. Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems , 3(1):393–416,

    work page

  23. [23]

    doi:10.1146/annurev-control-081219-092250

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-control-081219-092250

  24. [24]

    Adaptive pi control of statcom for voltage regulation

    Yao Xu and Fangxing Li. Adaptive pi control of statcom for voltage regulation. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery , 29(3):1002–1011,

    work page

  25. [25]

    doi:10.1109/TPWRD.2013.2291576. 21

    work page doi:10.1109/tpwrd.2013.2291576 2013