pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.04821 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-06 · 📡 eess.SY · cs.SY

Recognition: unknown

Toward less conservative distributed stability analysis of power systems via matrix-valued differential passivity indices

Xi Ru , Cong Fu , Zhongze Li , Xiaoyu Peng , Feng Liu
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 16:52 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SY cs.SY
keywords passivity indicesdistributed stabilitypower systemsmatrix-valueddifferential passivityMIMO systemsnonlinear dynamics
0
0 comments X

The pith

Power systems stay stable when aggregate device passivity excess offsets network shortage via matrix indices.

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

This paper seeks to establish that matrix-valued differential passivity indices allow less conservative distributed stability certificates for power systems containing multi-input multi-output devices. Scalar indices often introduce excess conservatism by ignoring inter-channel interactions, limiting their use in accurate analysis of complex grids. By extending to matrix form, the work derives semi-distributed and fully distributed criteria showing stability when total passivity excess from devices compensates the network's shortage. It supplies closed-form expressions for typical components to support practical application.

Core claim

System stability is guaranteed when the aggregate passivity excess of devices compensates for the passivity shortage imposed by the network, with the matrix-valued indices capturing channel couplings to reduce conservatism compared to scalar versions.

What carries the argument

The matrix-valued differential passivity index for MIMO subsystems, which accounts for both channel-wise properties and inter-channel coupling effects.

If this is right

  • Stability criteria apply to systems with heterogeneous nonlinear devices without requiring a centralized model.
  • Analytical passivity matrix expressions for standard components enable easy compositional checks.
  • Case studies confirm the criteria work on small and large-scale systems like the IEEE 118-bus network.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If these indices can be estimated from data, the approach could support online stability assessment in real power grids.
  • Similar matrix extensions might apply to stability analysis in other networked systems with MIMO components, such as chemical plants or vehicle platoons.
  • The reduced conservatism could allow operating closer to stability boundaries, improving efficiency.

Load-bearing premise

Heterogeneous nonlinear power system devices must admit computable matrix-valued differential passivity indices, and the network passivity shortage must be quantifiable without introducing much new conservatism.

What would settle it

Demonstrate a power system that satisfies the aggregate matrix excess condition but is actually unstable, or show that the matrix version provides no improvement over scalar indices in a realistic MIMO device case.

read the original abstract

Passivity indices have been widely adopted to derive distributed stability certificates for power systems. Nevertheless, conventional passivity indices remain scalar-valued even for multi-input-multi-output (MIMO) systems, which can introduce excessive conservatism and compromise analysis accuracy. To overcome these limitations, this paper extends the differential passivity index to a matrix-valued formulation that captures both channel-wise passivity properties and inter-channel coupling effects in MIMO subsystems. On this basis, semi-distributed and fully distributed stability criteria are developed for power systems with heterogeneous nonlinear devices. It is shown that system stability is guaranteed when the aggregate passivity excess of devices compensates for the passivity shortage imposed by the network. Furthermore, analytical passivity matrix expressions for typical power system components are derived, facilitating compositional stability analysis. Case studies on a three-bus system and a modified IEEE 118-bus system validate the effectiveness of the proposed framework.

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

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper extends the differential passivity index to a matrix-valued formulation for MIMO subsystems in power systems. It develops semi-distributed and fully distributed compositional stability criteria showing that stability holds when the aggregate passivity excess of heterogeneous nonlinear devices compensates for the network-imposed passivity shortage. Analytical expressions for the matrix indices of typical components (synchronous machines, loads, etc.) are derived, and the framework is validated via case studies on a three-bus system and a modified IEEE 118-bus system.

Significance. If the matrix-valued indices and compositional criteria are correctly derived, the work meaningfully reduces conservatism relative to scalar passivity indices by capturing channel couplings, while the analytical expressions and dual (semi- and fully-) distributed criteria directly support practical compositional analysis of large-scale power systems.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract and the section deriving analytical passivity matrix expressions] The central claim that stability is guaranteed by aggregate excess compensating network shortage rests on the matrix-valued indices being well-defined and computable for the heterogeneous nonlinear devices considered. The abstract states that analytical expressions are derived for typical components, but the manuscript should explicitly delineate the class of devices for which closed-form matrix indices exist versus those requiring numerical approximation, as this directly affects the scope of the reduced-conservatism claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. [The sections presenting the stability criteria] Clarify the precise information-exchange requirements distinguishing the semi-distributed from the fully distributed criterion, including any assumptions on communication topology.
  2. [Case studies] In the case-study sections, report the numerical values or computation method used for the matrix indices on the IEEE 118-bus system to support reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comment and positive overall assessment. We address the major comment below and will incorporate the suggested clarification in the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and the section deriving analytical passivity matrix expressions] The central claim that stability is guaranteed by aggregate excess compensating network shortage rests on the matrix-valued indices being well-defined and computable for the heterogeneous nonlinear devices considered. The abstract states that analytical expressions are derived for typical components, but the manuscript should explicitly delineate the class of devices for which closed-form matrix indices exist versus those requiring numerical approximation, as this directly affects the scope of the reduced-conservatism claim.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit delineation improves clarity and better scopes the reduced-conservatism claim. In the revised manuscript we add a short paragraph at the close of Section III (Analytical Passivity Matrix Expressions) that states: closed-form matrix-valued differential passivity indices are derived for the standard components whose models admit explicit nonlinear state-space representations, namely synchronous machines (swing equation plus AVR), constant-power loads, and ZIP loads. For devices whose dynamics preclude closed-form solutions (e.g., detailed inverter models with black-box controllers or high-order nonlinearities), the indices remain well-defined and can be obtained numerically via the optimization procedure in Remark 2 or via trajectory-based estimation. The stability theorems themselves require only that the indices exist and satisfy the aggregate excess condition; the added text therefore does not alter any result but directly addresses the referee’s concern about the practical reach of the analytical expressions. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The paper extends scalar differential passivity indices to a matrix-valued formulation and derives semi-distributed and fully distributed stability criteria via standard compositional arguments: stability holds when aggregate device passivity excess compensates network shortage. Analytical expressions for components (synchronous machines, loads) are obtained from device dynamics without reduction to fitted parameters or self-referential definitions. No step equates a claimed prediction to its input by construction, and the central claim remains independent of any self-citation chain. This matches the provided reader's assessment of an independent extension with no internal inconsistency.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on standard passivity theory assumptions extended by the new matrix-valued index; no free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Power system subsystems admit matrix-valued differential passivity indices that can be derived analytically for typical components.
    This is the key extension enabling the stability criteria and is invoked to support compositional analysis.
  • domain assumption The network imposes a quantifiable passivity shortage that can be compensated by device excess.
    Central to the stability guarantee stated in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5458 in / 1330 out tokens · 82872 ms · 2026-05-08T16:52:44.690790+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

35 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Milano, Power system modelling and scripting

    F. Milano, Power system modelling and scripting. Springer Science & Business Media, 2010

    2010

  2. [2]

    M. J. Gibbard, P. Pourbeik, and D. J. Vowles, Small-signal stability, control and dynamic performance of power systems. University of Adelaide press, 2015

    2015

  3. [3]

    A Structure Preserving Model for Power System Stability Analysis,

    A. R. Bergen and D. J. Hill, “A Structure Preserving Model for Power System Stability Analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, vol. PAS-100, no. 1, pp. 25–35, Jan. 1981, doi: 10.1109/TPAS.1981.316883

    work page doi:10.1109/tpas.1981.316883 1981

  4. [4]

    Power system stability,

    P. Kundur, “Power system stability,” Power system stability and control, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 7–1, 2007

    2007

  5. [5]

    Power System Stability with Power-Electronic Converter Interfaced Renewable Power Generation: Present Issues and Future Trends,

    L. Meegahapola, A. Sguarezi, J. S. Bryant, M. Gu, E. R. Conde D., and R. B. A. Cunha, “Power System Stability with Power-Electronic Converter Interfaced Renewable Power Generation: Present Issues and Future Trends,” Energies, vol. 13, no. 13, p. 3441, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.3390/en13133441

    work page doi:10.3390/en13133441 2020

  6. [6]

    Limitations, challenges, and solution approaches in grid-connected renewable energy systems,

    M. A. Basit, S. Dilshad, R. Badar, and S. M. Sami ur Rehman, “Limitations, challenges, and solution approaches in grid-connected renewable energy systems,” International Journal of Energy Research, vol. 44, no. 6, pp. 4132–4162, 2020

    2020

  7. [7]

    Challenges of renewable energy penetration on power system flexibility: A survey,

    S. Impram, S. V. Nese, and B. Oral, “Challenges of renewable energy penetration on power system flexibility: A survey,” Energy strategy reviews, vol. 31, p. 100539, 2020

    2020

  8. [8]

    Power system stability issues, classifications and research ` ARTICLE ARTICLE 1 7 prospects in the context of high-penetration of renewables and power electronics,

    J. Shair, H. Li, J. Hu, and X. Xie, “Power system stability issues, classifications and research ` ARTICLE ARTICLE 1 7 prospects in the context of high-penetration of renewables and power electronics,” Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 145, p. 111111, Jul. 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2021.111111

    work page doi:10.1016/j.rser.2021.111111 2021

  9. [9]

    H. K. Khalil, Nonlinear systems. Prentice Hall, 2002

    2002

  10. [10]

    Passivity and stability of systems with a state representation,

    R. Estrada and C. Desoer, “Passivity and stability of systems with a state representation,” International Journal of Control, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1–26, 1971

    1971

  11. [11]

    Interconnection Schemes in Modeling and Control,

    P. Borja, J. Ferguson, and A. Van Der Schaft, “Interconnection Schemes in Modeling and Control,” IEEE Control Syst. Lett., vol. 7, pp. 2287–2292, 2023, doi: 10.1109/LCSYS.2023.3286124

    work page doi:10.1109/lcsys.2023.3286124 2023

  12. [12]

    A Passivity-Based Framework for Stability Analysis and Control Including Power Network Dynamics,

    C. Spanias, P. Aristidou, and M. Michaelides, “A Passivity-Based Framework for Stability Analysis and Control Including Power Network Dynamics,” IEEE Systems Journal, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 5000– 5010, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.1109/JSYST.2020.3007582

    work page doi:10.1109/jsyst.2020.3007582 2021

  13. [13]

    Passivity and Decentralized Stability Conditions for Grid-Forming Converters,

    X. He and F. Dörfler, “Passivity and Decentralized Stability Conditions for Grid-Forming Converters,” IEEE Trans. Power Syst., pp. 1–4, 2024, doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2024.3360707

    work page doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2024.3360707 2024

  14. [14]

    Distributed Stability Conditions for Power Systems With Heterogeneous Nonlinear Bus Dynamics,

    P. Yang, F. Liu, Z. Wang, and C. Shen, “Distributed Stability Conditions for Power Systems With Heterogeneous Nonlinear Bus Dynamics,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 2313–2324, May 2020, doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2019.2951202

    work page doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2019.2951202 2020

  15. [15]

    Passivity analysis and passivation of feedback systems using passivity indices,

    F. Zhu, M. Xia, and P. J. Antsaklis, “Passivity analysis and passivation of feedback systems using passivity indices,” in 2014 American Control Conference, Jun. 2014, pp. 1833–1838. doi: 10.1109/ACC.2014.6858850

    work page doi:10.1109/acc.2014.6858850 2014

  16. [16]

    Consensus of Heterogeneous Multi-Agent Systems With Diffusive Couplings via Passivity Indices,

    M. Li, L. Su, and G. Chesi, “Consensus of Heterogeneous Multi-Agent Systems With Diffusive Couplings via Passivity Indices,” IEEE Control Systems Letters, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 434–439, Apr. 2019, doi: 10.1109/LCSYS.2019.2893490

    work page doi:10.1109/lcsys.2019.2893490 2019

  17. [17]

    Passivity indices and passivation of systems with application to systems with input/output delay,

    M. Xia, P. J. Antsaklis, and V. Gupta, “Passivity indices and passivation of systems with application to systems with input/output delay,” in 53rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Los Angeles, CA, USA: IEEE, Dec. 2014, pp. 783–788. doi: 10.1109/CDC.2014.7039477

    work page doi:10.1109/cdc.2014.7039477 2014

  18. [18]

    On relationships among passivity, positive realness, and dissipativity in linear systems,

    N. Kottenstette, M. J. McCourt, M. Xia, V. Gupta, and P. J. Antsaklis, “On relationships among passivity, positive realness, and dissipativity in linear systems,” Automatica, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 1003–1016, Apr. 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.automatica.2014.02.013

    work page doi:10.1016/j.automatica.2014.02.013 2014

  19. [19]

    Passivity-Based Stability Assessment of Grid-Connected VSCs—An Overview,

    L. Harnefors, X. Wang, A. G. Yepes, and F. Blaabjerg, “Passivity-Based Stability Assessment of Grid-Connected VSCs—An Overview,” IEEE Journal of Emerging and Selected Topics in Power Electronics, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 116–125, Mar. 2016, doi: 10.1109/JESTPE.2015.2490549

    work page doi:10.1109/jestpe.2015.2490549 2016

  20. [20]

    A Generalized Passivity-Based Stability Criterion for Assessing Large Signal Stability of Interconnected DC Power Systems,

    S. Plesnick and P. Singh, “A Generalized Passivity-Based Stability Criterion for Assessing Large Signal Stability of Interconnected DC Power Systems,” IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 30–38, Feb. 2023, doi: 10.1109/TAES.2022.3189328

    work page doi:10.1109/taes.2022.3189328 2023

  21. [21]

    Passivity-Based Stability Analysis and Generic Controller Design for Grid-Forming Inverter,

    G. Wu et al., “Passivity-Based Stability Analysis and Generic Controller Design for Grid-Forming Inverter,” IEEE Transactions on Power Electronics, vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 5832–5843, May 2023, doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2023.3237608

    work page doi:10.1109/tpel.2023.3237608 2023

  22. [22]

    Distributed stability analysis for power systems under persistent disturbance,

    X. Ru, P. Yang, F. Liu, and H. Mao, “Distributed stability analysis for power systems under persistent disturbance,” in 2022 41st Chinese Control Conference (CCC), IEEE, 2022, pp. 6160– 6165

    2022

  23. [23]

    Passivity-Based Decentralized Criteria for Small-Signal Stability of Power Systems with Converter-Interfaced Generation,

    K. Dey and A. M. Kulkarni, “Passivity-Based Decentralized Criteria for Small-Signal Stability of Power Systems with Converter-Interfaced Generation,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, pp. 1–14, 2022, doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2022.3192302

    work page doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2022.3192302 2022

  24. [24]

    Matrix-Valued Passivity Indices: Foundations, Properties, and Stability Implications,

    X. Ru, X. Peng, X. Chen, Z. Wang, P. Yang, and F. Liu, “Matrix-Valued Passivity Indices: Foundations, Properties, and Stability Implications,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.04796, 2026

    work page arXiv 2026

  25. [25]

    A unifying energy-based approach to stability of power grids with market dynamics,

    T. Stegink, C. De Persis, and A. van der Schaft, “A unifying energy-based approach to stability of power grids with market dynamics,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 62, no. 6, pp. 2612–2622, 2016

    2016

  26. [26]

    Online Dynamic Security Assessment of Microgrid Interconnections in Smart Distribution Systems,

    Y. Zhang and L. Xie, “Online Dynamic Security Assessment of Microgrid Interconnections in Smart Distribution Systems,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 3246–3254, Nov. 2015, doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2014.2374876

    work page doi:10.1109/tpwrs.2014.2374876 2015

  27. [27]

    Voltage Stabilization in Microgrids via Quadratic Droop Control,

    J. W. Simpson-Porco, F. Dörfler, and F. Bullo, “Voltage Stabilization in Microgrids via Quadratic Droop Control,” IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 1239–1253, Mar. 2017, doi: 10.1109/TAC.2016.2585094

    work page doi:10.1109/tac.2016.2585094 2017

  28. [28]

    Frequency control in isolated/islanded microgrids through voltage regulation,

    M. Farrokhabadi, C. A. Cañizares, and K. Bhattacharya, “Frequency control in isolated/islanded microgrids through voltage regulation,” IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 1185– ARTICLE ARTICLE Passivity matrix-based distributed stability analysis 1 8 1194, 2015

    2015

  29. [29]

    Improving the power system dynamic response through a combined voltage-frequency control of distributed energy resources,

    W. Zhong, G. Tzounas, and F. Milano, “Improving the power system dynamic response through a combined voltage-frequency control of distributed energy resources,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 4375–4384, 2022

    2022

  30. [30]

    Impact of Angle-voltage Coupling on Stability of Inverter-dominated Power Systems: A Damping Perspective,

    X. Peng, C. Fu, P. Yang, X. Ru, and F. Liu, “Impact of Angle-voltage Coupling on Stability of Inverter-dominated Power Systems: A Damping Perspective,” Authorea Preprints, 2024

    2024

  31. [31]

    Study of the existence of energy functions for power systems with losses,

    H.-D. Chiang, “Study of the existence of energy functions for power systems with losses,” IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems, vol. 36, no. 11, pp. 1423–1429, Nov. 1989, doi: 10.1109/31.41298

    work page doi:10.1109/31.41298 1989

  32. [32]

    Direct stability analysis of electric power systems using energy functions: theory, applications, and perspective,

    H.-D. Chang, C.-C. Chu, and G. Cauley, “Direct stability analysis of electric power systems using energy functions: theory, applications, and perspective,” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 83, no. 11, pp. 1497–1529, 1995, doi: 10.1109/5.481632

    work page doi:10.1109/5.481632 1995

  33. [33]

    The development of equivalent system technique for deriving an energy function reflecting transfer conductances,

    Y.-H. Moon, B.-H. Cho, T.-H. Rho, and B.-K. Choi, “The development of equivalent system technique for deriving an energy function reflecting transfer conductances,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 1335–1341, Nov. 1999, doi: 10.1109/59.801893

    work page doi:10.1109/59.801893 1999

  34. [34]

    On-line transient stability screening of 14,000-bus models using TEPCO-BCU: Evaluations and methods,

    H.-D. Chiang, J. Tong, and Y. Tada, “On-line transient stability screening of 14,000-bus models using TEPCO-BCU: Evaluations and methods,” in IEEE PES General Meeting, 2010, pp. 1–8. doi: 10.1109/PES.2010.5590026

    work page doi:10.1109/pes.2010.5590026 2010

  35. [35]

    MATPOWER: Steady-state operations, planning, and analysis tools for power systems research and education,

    R. D. Zimmerman, C. E. Murillo-Sánchez, and R. J. Thomas, “MATPOWER: 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.  

    2010