pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.04400 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-06 · 📡 eess.SY · cs.SY· eess.SP

LACE-S: Toward Sensitivity-consistent Locational Average Carbon Emissions via Neural Representation

Young-ho Cho , Min-Seung Ko , Hao Zhu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 20:23 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SY cs.SYeess.SP
keywords locational carbon emissionssensitivity consistencyneural representationspatial load shiftinggrid decarbonizationemission metricszonal aggregationpower system optimization
0
0 comments X

The pith

A neural representation creates a locational carbon emissions metric that stays consistent with global reductions even when used to shift loads.

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

The paper develops LACE-S, a metric for average carbon emissions at each grid location that remains valid across wide operating ranges. Existing metrics only work near specific points and can raise total emissions when they guide spatial load shifting. The new approach trains a neural model to match total emissions exactly via a projection step and to reproduce marginal sensitivities through Jacobian regularization. Tests on the IEEE 30-bus system show that load shifts guided by LACE-S reliably lower system-wide emissions while prior metrics often increase them. A zonal version, ZACE-S, further reduces complexity by grouping buses into market zones.

Core claim

The central claim is that a neural network trained with an explicit projection layer to enforce total emission balance and with Jacobian regularization to match marginal sensitivities across the full loading region produces a locational average carbon emissions metric that remains physically consistent and yields lower post-shift emissions when used for spatial load shifting.

What carries the argument

The neural model with projection layer for emission balance and Jacobian regularization that partitions load buses according to aligned generator responses.

If this is right

  • Spatial load shifting guided by LACE-S lowers system-wide emissions instead of raising them.
  • The metric matches both total emissions and their sensitivities over the entire loading region.
  • ZACE-S provides a scalable zonal version by mapping nodes to predefined market zones.
  • The approach improves consistency with global emission patterns compared with non-regularized designs.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same neural structure could be retrained on data from larger or real-world grids to extend the consistency property beyond the IEEE 30-bus case.
  • LACE-S values might be combined with existing market signals to create joint carbon and price signals for demand response.
  • If the regularization term successfully identifies generator-response clusters, it could reveal natural zones for carbon pricing without manual partitioning.

Load-bearing premise

The neural model trained on limited regions and one test case will correctly predict sensitivities and balances on unseen grids and wider operating conditions.

What would settle it

A test on a second power system model or real utility data where spatial load shifts directed by LACE-S values fail to reduce total emissions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.04400 by Hao Zhu, Min-Seung Ko, Young-ho Cho.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (a) A 2-bus system with two generators and loads; and the LMCE distribution of (b) d1 and (c) d2. where ∂g ∗ ∂di can be computed analytically via the Lagrangian sensitivity analysis of (1); see e.g., [18]. This sensitivity-based metric also has some limitations. First, the LMCE values can change sharply with varying operating points, as the marginal generators depend on the market congestion condition. Mor… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: illustrates the overall architecture of our proposed feedforward NN of L hidden layers to represent the LACE vector λˆ ∈ R D for any load profile d ∈ R D. Denoting the layer ℓ by z ℓ , with the input z 0 = d and the output z L = λˆ, we form the layer-wise transformation as z ℓ = σ ℓ (Wℓ z ℓ−1 + b ℓ ), ℓ = 1, . . . , L, (7) where σ ℓ (·) stands for the activation function with correspond￾ing trainable weigh… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Visualization of dispatch Jacobian matrices (∂g ∗ /∂d) on the IEEE 14-bus system under two distinct congestion patterns. A. Jacobian-based Regularization To ensure that the learned mapping respects the underly￾ing market structure, we introduce regularization terms on the Jacobian matrix of our LACE-S model, as defined by J := [∂λˆ i(d)/∂dj ]. In market dispatch, load buses can be partitioned into groups t… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The proposed neural approximation models estimate ZACE-S from load profiles using trainable weights. • Stage 1: Initialize the trainable parameters to predict the known ACE metric in (4). Anchoring the NN output to this baseline provides a stable initialization for the subsequent training stages. • Stage 2: Train with the primary loss L in (13) to approach the conditions of total balance and sensitivity co… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparisons of the (a) maximum and (b) average absolute deviation from the perfect balance condition for the Full_NN, LACE￾S, and ZACE-S models using the 30-bus system.        (a) Max deviation        (b) Average deviation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Comparisons of the (a) maximum and (b) average absolute deviation in approximating the LMCE for the Full_NN, LACE-S, and ZACE-S models using the 30-bus system. (18) for LACE-S and ZACE-S, respectively, for 1,000 epochs with a learning rate 1e−3. We use 90% of the samples for training and the remaining 10% for testing, and all reported performance comparisons are evaluated in the testing set. A. LACE-S Mode… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Histograms of realized emission changes across 1,000 load profiles for (a) Opt-shift and (b)-(e) metric-based SLS. it never increases the total emissions beyond the red line. On the contrary, the three other metrics, LMCE, LACE-R, and CEF, all have a significant number of samples beyond the red line, and skew the distributions toward the positive range. LMCE and LACE-R provide very similar distributions, w… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Carbon-aware grid optimization relies on accurate locational emission metrics to effectively guide demand-side decarbonization tasks such as spatial load shifting. However, existing metrics are only valid around limited operating regions and unfortunately cannot generalize the emission patterns beyond these regions. When these metrics are used to signal carbon-sensitive resources, they could paradoxically increase system-wide emissions. This work seeks to develop a sensitivity-consistent metric for locational average carbon emissions (LACE-S) using a neural representation approach. To ensure physical validity, the neural model enforces total emission balance through an explicit projection layer while matching marginal emission sensitivities across the entire loading region. Jacobian-based regularization is further introduced to capture the underlying partition of load buses with closely aligned generator responses. Moreover, we present a scalable zonal aggregation strategy, ZACE-S, to reduce the model complexity by mapping nodal inputs to predefined market zones. Numerical tests on the IEEE 30-bus system have verified the performance improvements of LACE-S in matching total emissions and their sensitivities over the non-regularized design. Crucially, while spatial load shifting driven by existing metrics often increases the post-shift emissions, the proposed LACE-S metric has led to a reliable reduction of system-wide emissions, demonstrating its excellent consistency with the global emission patterns.

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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes LACE-S, a neural representation for locational average carbon emissions that enforces total emission balance via an explicit projection layer and matches marginal sensitivities via Jacobian regularization. It also introduces a scalable zonal aggregation ZACE-S. On the IEEE 30-bus system, LACE-S is shown to better match total emissions and sensitivities than non-regularized variants, and spatial load shifting guided by LACE-S produces reliable system-wide emission reductions (unlike existing metrics).

Significance. If the generalization properties hold, the constrained neural approach could supply a practically useful locational emission signal for demand-side decarbonization that avoids the emission increases observed with prior metrics. The explicit projection and Jacobian regularization constitute a clear methodological strength for embedding physical consistency; the zonal aggregation further improves scalability.

major comments (2)
  1. [Numerical tests section] Numerical tests section: the central claim that LACE-S produces reliable system-wide emission reductions under spatial load shifting rests on results confined to the IEEE 30-bus system and its training regions. No larger test cases, out-of-distribution loadings, or real-grid data are shown, even though the introduction notes that existing metrics fail precisely when extrapolated.
  2. [Methodology section] Methodology section: total emission balance and marginal sensitivity matching are enforced by construction through the projection layer and Jacobian regularization term in the training loss. Consequently, the reported consistency with global emission patterns is achieved by design rather than emerging as an independent prediction that could be falsified on held-out data.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Numerical tests section] The numerical results lack any description of training data generation, number of samples, hyperparameter selection for the regularization strength, or statistical error bars on the reported performance gains and emission reductions.
  2. [Numerical tests section] A direct comparison table of post-shift emission changes across multiple load-shift scenarios and all baseline metrics would strengthen the evidence for the headline claim.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 1 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and insightful comments. We address each major comment below, acknowledging limitations where they exist and proposing targeted revisions to improve clarity and scope without overstating the current results.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Numerical tests section] Numerical tests section: the central claim that LACE-S produces reliable system-wide emission reductions under spatial load shifting rests on results confined to the IEEE 30-bus system and its training regions. No larger test cases, out-of-distribution loadings, or real-grid data are shown, even though the introduction notes that existing metrics fail precisely when extrapolated.

    Authors: We agree that the numerical validation is limited to the IEEE 30-bus system, which is a standard benchmark allowing direct comparison with prior metrics. The spatial load-shifting experiments do test operating points outside the exact training samples to probe generalization within this system, as highlighted in the abstract and results. However, we acknowledge that broader validation on larger networks, more diverse out-of-distribution loadings, or real-grid data would further support the claims. In the revised manuscript, we will expand the numerical tests section with additional discussion of these scope limitations, include further out-of-distribution test cases feasible within the 30-bus system, and add a dedicated paragraph on future extensions to larger systems and real data. The ZACE-S zonal aggregation is already positioned as a scalability enabler. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Methodology section] Methodology section: total emission balance and marginal sensitivity matching are enforced by construction through the projection layer and Jacobian regularization term in the training loss. Consequently, the reported consistency with global emission patterns is achieved by design rather than emerging as an independent prediction that could be falsified on held-out data.

    Authors: We concur that the projection layer enforces total emission balance by construction, which is an intentional design to guarantee physical validity as stated in the methodology. The Jacobian regularization term penalizes deviations in marginal sensitivities but allows the neural representation to learn locational patterns from data under these constraints. The load-shifting experiments provide an independent evaluation on decision-making scenarios not directly optimized during training, where LACE-S yields emission reductions while baselines do not. We will revise the methodology section to more explicitly distinguish the enforced constraints from the learned components and to highlight the load-shifting results as a falsification-style test on held-out operating conditions. revision: yes

standing simulated objections not resolved
  • Demonstration of results on larger test cases beyond the IEEE 30-bus system or on real-grid data, which would require new experiments and data access outside the current manuscript scope.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

LACE-S consistency and emission reductions enforced by neural architecture and loss rather than independently derived

specific steps
  1. fitted input called prediction [Abstract]
    "To ensure physical validity, the neural model enforces total emission balance through an explicit projection layer while matching marginal emission sensitivities across the entire loading region. Jacobian-based regularization is further introduced to capture the underlying partition of load buses with closely aligned generator responses. ... Numerical tests on the IEEE 30-bus system have verified the performance improvements of LACE-S in matching total emissions and their sensitivities over the non-regularized design. Crucially, while spatial load shifting driven by existing metrics often [in"

    The model architecture and loss are built to enforce the exact balance and sensitivity properties that are later reported as 'verified' improvements and 'reliable reduction of system-wide emissions.' The consistency with global patterns is therefore achieved by construction of the training objective on the IEEE 30-bus data, not as an independent first-principles result.

full rationale

The paper defines LACE-S via a neural model whose projection layer and Jacobian regularization are explicitly constructed to enforce total emission balance and marginal sensitivity matching. Numerical tests on the IEEE 30-bus system (the training domain) then verify improved matching and reliable emission reductions under load shifting. This reduces the central claim of 'excellent consistency with the global emission patterns' to a fitted property of the enforced loss rather than an emergent prediction from external physics or out-of-sample verification.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on a learned neural model whose parameters are fitted to data and on domain assumptions about emission behavior that are not independently verified outside the model.

free parameters (2)
  • neural network weights and biases
    Fitted during training to match emission patterns and sensitivities on the test system.
  • Jacobian regularization strength
    Chosen to capture partitions of load buses with aligned generator responses.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Total system emissions can be exactly recovered by projecting the neural output
    Invoked to guarantee physical validity of the locational metric.
  • domain assumption Marginal emission sensitivities remain consistent across the full loading region
    Core premise allowing the metric to generalize beyond limited operating points.
invented entities (1)
  • LACE-S metric no independent evidence
    purpose: Sensitivity-consistent locational average carbon emissions
    Newly defined quantity realized through the neural representation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5526 in / 1534 out tokens · 49145 ms · 2026-05-10T20:23:30.530365+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Resiliencedriven planning of elec- tric power systems against extreme weather events,

    A. Poudyal, A. Dubey, and Z. Wang, “Resiliencedriven planning of elec- tric power systems against extreme weather events,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems , vol. 39, no. 2, p. 12341248, 2023

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    World energy outlook 2023,

    International Energy Agency, “World energy outlook 2023,” IEA, Tech. Rep., 2023

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    Distributionally robust trading strategies for renewable energy producers,

    P . Pinson, “Distributionally robust trading strategies for renewable energy producers,” IEEE Transactions on Energy Markets, Policy and Regulation, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 37–47, 2023

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Uncertainty- informed renewable energy scheduling: A scalable bilevel framework,

    D. Zhao, V . Dvorkin, S. Delikaraoglou, A. Botterud et al., “Uncertainty- informed renewable energy scheduling: A scalable bilevel framework,” IEEE Transactions on Energy Markets, Policy and Regulation , vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 132–145, 2023

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Opti- mizing forward market trading strategy for renewable power producers considering revenue sufficiency and risk,

    M. Ma, J. Zhang, H. Jiang, Y . Chen, Y . Wang, and N. Zhang, “Opti- mizing forward market trading strategy for renewable power producers considering revenue sufficiency and risk,” IEEE Transactions on Energy Markets, Policy and Regulation , 2025

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    Encoding carbon emission flow in energy management: A compact constraint learning approach,

    L. Sang, Y . Xu, and H. Sun, “Encoding carbon emission flow in energy management: A compact constraint learning approach,” IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy , vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 123–135, 2023

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Carbon-aware optimal power flow,

    X. Chen, A. Sun, W. Shi, and N. Li, “Carbon-aware optimal power flow,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems , 2024

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Carbon-aware market participation for building energy man- agement systems,

    Y .-h. Cho, M. Chehade, F. Al-Janahi, S. Lim, J. Mohammadi, and H. Zhu, “Carbon-aware market participation for building energy man- agement systems,” in 2026 IEEE PESGM . IEEE, 2026, pp. 1–5

    work page 2026

  9. [9]

    The impact of multi-location electricity consumers’ flexibility on distributed energy resources’ pricing power,

    S. Mollaeivaneghi, R. Abolpour, and F. Steinke, “The impact of multi-location electricity consumers’ flexibility on distributed energy resources’ pricing power,” IEEE Transactions on Energy Markets, Policy and Regulation , 2025

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    PGLib-CO2: A power grid library for real-time computation and optimization of carbon emissions,

    Y .-h. Cho, M.-S. Ko, and H. Zhu, “PGLib-CO2: A power grid library for real-time computation and optimization of carbon emissions,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.14662 , 2026

    work page arXiv 2026

  11. [11]

    Carbon emission flow in networks,

    C. Kang, T. Zhou, Q. Chen, Q. Xu, Q. Xia, and Z. Ji, “Carbon emission flow in networks,” Scientific reports , vol. 2, no. 1, p. 479, 2012

    work page 2012

  12. [12]

    Carbon emission flow from generation to demand: A network-based model,

    C. Kang, T. Zhou, Q. Chen, J. Wang, Y . Sun, Q. Xia, and H. Y an, “Carbon emission flow from generation to demand: A network-based model,” IEEE transactions on smart grid , vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 2386–2394, 2015

    work page 2015

  13. [13]

    Carbon flow tracing based consumers indirect carbon emissions calculation,

    Y . Wang, M. Zhou, Z. Wu, J. Wang, and G. Li, “Carbon flow tracing based consumers indirect carbon emissions calculation,” in 2023 IEEE PESGM. IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–5

    work page 2023

  14. [14]

    Towards carbon-free electricity: A flow-based framework for power grid carbon accounting and decar- bonization,

    X. Chen, H. Chao, W. Shi, and N. Li, “Towards carbon-free electricity: A flow-based framework for power grid carbon accounting and decar- bonization,” Energy Conversion and Economics , vol. 5, no. 6, pp. 396– 418, 2024

    work page 2024

  15. [15]

    Locational marginal price sensitivities,

    A. J. Conejo, E. Castillo, R. Mínguez, and F. Milano, “Locational marginal price sensitivities,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems , vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 2026–2033, 2005

    work page 2026

  16. [16]

    Analysis of marginal carbon intensities in constrained power networks,

    P . A. Ruiz and A. Rudkevich, “Analysis of marginal carbon intensities in constrained power networks,” in Proceedings of the 43rd HICSS . IEEE, 2010, pp. 1–9

    work page 2010

  17. [17]

    Using marginal emission rates to optimize investment in carbon dioxide displacement technologies,

    H. He, A. Rudkevich, X. Li, R. Tabors, A. Derenchuk, P . Centolella, N. Kumthekar, C. Ling, and I. Shavel, “Using marginal emission rates to optimize investment in carbon dioxide displacement technologies,” The Electricity Journal , vol. 34, no. 9, p. 107028, 2021

    work page 2021

  18. [18]

    A market- clearing-based sensitivity model for locational marginal and average carbon emission,

    Z. Lu, L. Y an, J. Wang, C. Kang, M. Shahidehpour, and Z. Li, “A market- clearing-based sensitivity model for locational marginal and average carbon emission,” IEEE Transactions on Energy Markets, Policy and Regulation, 2024

    work page 2024

  19. [19]

    Convex- hull of locational marginal carbon emission for carbon management considering emissions during non-steady-state operation hours,

    Z. Lu, L. Y an, Z. Li, Y . Xiao, M. Shahidehpour, and X. Wang, “Convex- hull of locational marginal carbon emission for carbon management considering emissions during non-steady-state operation hours,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid , 2026

    work page 2026

  20. [20]

    A guide to reducing carbon emissions through data center geographical load shifting,

    J. Lindberg, Y . Abdennadher, J. Chen, B. C. Lesieutre, and L. Roald, “A guide to reducing carbon emissions through data center geographical load shifting,” in Proceedings of the 12th ACM International Conference on Future Energy Systems , 2021, pp. 430–436

    work page 2021

  21. [21]

    Using geographic load shifting to reduce carbon emissions,

    J. Lindberg, B. C. Lesieutre, and L. A. Roald, “Using geographic load shifting to reduce carbon emissions,” Electric Power Systems Research , vol. 212, p. 108586, 2022

    work page 2022

  22. [22]

    Electricityemissions. jl: A frame- work for the comparison of carbon intensity signals,

    J. Gorka, N. Rhodes, and L. Roald, “Electricityemissions. jl: A frame- work for the comparison of carbon intensity signals,” in Proceedings of the 16th ACM International Conference on Future and Sustainable Energy Systems , 2025, pp. 19–30

    work page 2025

  23. [23]

    Available: http://labs.ece.uw.edu/pstca/

    [Online]. Available: http://labs.ece.uw.edu/pstca/

    work page

  24. [24]

    Machine learning for scalable and optimal load shedding under power system contingency,

    Y . Zhou and H. Zhu, “Machine learning for scalable and optimal load shedding under power system contingency,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2025

    work page 2025

  25. [25]

    An amendment to the GHG protocol corporate stan- dard GHG protocol scope 2 guidance,

    M. Sotos, “An amendment to the GHG protocol corporate stan- dard GHG protocol scope 2 guidance,” World Resources Institute, USA. https://ghgprotocol. org/sites/default/files/2023-03/Scope, vol. 202, 2015

    work page 2023

  26. [26]

    Dynamic locational marginal emissions via implicit differenti- ation,

    L. F. V alenzuela, A. Degleris, A. El Gamal, M. Pavone, and R. Ra- jagopal, “Dynamic locational marginal emissions via implicit differenti- ation,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems , vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 1138– 1147, 2023

    work page 2023

  27. [27]

    Multilayer feedforward networks are universal approximators,

    K. Hornik, M. Stinchcombe, and H. White, “Multilayer feedforward networks are universal approximators,” Neural networks , vol. 2, no. 5, pp. 359–366, 1989

    work page 1989

  28. [28]

    Data-driven mod- eling of linearizable power flow for large- scale grid topology optimization,

    Y .-h. Cho and H. Zhu, “Data-driven modeling of linearizable power flow for large-scale grid topology optimization,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.13956, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  29. [29]

    Sparse neural approxi- mations for bilevel adversarial problems in power grids,

    Y .-h. Cho, H. Nagarajan, D. Deka, and H. Zhu, “Sparse neural approxi- mations for bilevel adversarial problems in power grids,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.06187, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Probabilistic forecasting of real-time LMP and network congestion,

    Y . Ji, R. J. Thomas, and L. Tong, “Probabilistic forecasting of real-time LMP and network congestion,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems , vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 831–841, 2016

    work page 2016

  31. [31]

    Grid topology identifica- tion using electricity prices,

    V . Kekatos, G. B. Giannakis, and R. Baldick, “Grid topology identifica- tion using electricity prices,” in 2014 IEEE PESGM . IEEE, 2014, pp. 1–5

    work page 2014

  32. [32]

    2025, revision 62

    ISO New England, Manual M-11: Market Operations , ISO New England, Holyoke, MA, Feb. 2025, revision 62. [Online]. Available: https://www.iso-ne.com/participate/rules-procedures/manuals

    work page 2025

  33. [33]

    2023, revision 92

    PJM Interconnection, PJM Manual 28: Operating Agreement Account- ing, PJM Interconnection, Audubon, PA, Jul. 2023, revision 92. [Online]. Available: https://www.pjm.com/-/media/DotCom/documents/manuals/ archive/m28/m28v92-operating-agreement-accounting-07-26-2023.pdf

    work page 2023

  34. [34]

    MA T- POWER: Steady-state operations, planning, and analysis tools for power systems research and education,

    R. D. Zimmerman, C. E. Murillo-Sánchez, and R. J. Thomas, “MA T- POWER: Steady-state operations, planning, and analysis tools for power systems research and education,” IEEE Transactions on power systems , vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 12–19, 2010

    work page 2010

  35. [35]

    Assessment of PTDF based power system aggregation schemes,

    Y . Gebrekiros, G. Doorman, T. Preda, and A. Helseth, “Assessment of PTDF based power system aggregation schemes,” in 2015 IEEE EPEC . IEEE, 2015, pp. 358–363

    work page 2015

  36. [36]

    Balancing energy market integration considering grid constraints,

    Y . Gebrekiros, G. Doorman, S. Jaehnert, and H. Farahmand, “Balancing energy market integration considering grid constraints,” in 2015 IEEE Eindhoven PowerTech. IEEE, 2015, pp. 1–6

    work page 2015

  37. [37]

    Pyomo: modeling and solving mathematical programs in python,

    W. E. Hart, J.-P . Watson, and D. L. Woodruff, “Pyomo: modeling and solving mathematical programs in python,” Mathematical Programming Computation, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 219–260, 2011

    work page 2011

  38. [38]

    Gurobi Optimizer Reference Manual,

    Gurobi Optimization, LLC, “Gurobi Optimizer Reference Manual,”

    work page

  39. [39]

    Available: https://www.gurobi.com

    [Online]. Available: https://www.gurobi.com

    work page