Advertisement

Computational Optimization and Applications

, Volume 71, Issue 2, pp 553–608 | Cite as

Mathematical programming methods for microgrid design and operations: a survey on deterministic and stochastic approaches

  • Guanglei Wang
  • Hassan Hijazi
Article

Abstract

Planning and operating a power grid is a nontrivial exercise due to conflicting objectives, nonlinear constraints and uncertainties at multiple decision levels. Considerable research work has been dedicated to independently solve different aspects of the overall problem. This survey provides a detailed review of state-of-the-art techniques in mathematical optimization trying to address challenges in this area. We also provide a set of open problems and research perspectives.

Keywords

Global optimization Convex relaxation Uncertainty Power systems 

List of symbols

Sets

\(\mathbb {N}\)

Set of natural numbers

\(\mathbb {R}\)

Set of real numbers

\(\mathbb {C}\)

Set of complex numbers

N

Set of buses in the network

\(N_S\)

Bus set of distributed storage units

\(N_T\)

Bus set of transformers

\(N_G\)

Bus set of dispatchable generators

\(N_R\)

Set of buses having renewable generators connected to them

\(N_F\)

Set of fault buses

E

Set of lines (ij) in a power network network where i is the from node

\(E^R\)

Set of lines (ij) in a power network network where i is the to node

\(\mathcal {T}\)

Time horizon (e.g., 24 h).

Power flow parameters

\(\varvec{Z} = r+ \varvec{j}x\)

Line impedance, where j is the imaginary unit.

\(\varvec{Y} = g+ \varvec{j}b \)

Line admittance, \(g = \frac{r}{r^2 + x^2}, b = \frac{-x}{r^2 + x^2}\)

\(\varvec{b}^c\)

Line charging

\(\varvec{T} = \tau \angle \theta ^{s}\)

Transformer whose tap ratio has magnitude \(\tau \) and phase shifter angle \(\theta ^{s}\)

\(\varvec{\theta }^M\)

Phase angle difference limit

\(\varvec{Y^{s}} = g^s + \varvec{j} b^s\)

Bus shunt admittance

\(\varvec{S^d} = p^d + \varvec{j} q^d\)

AC power demand

\(\varvec{c}_0, \varvec{c}_1,\varvec{c}_2\)

Generation cost coefficients

\(\mathfrak {R}(\cdot )\)

Real component of a complex number

\(\mathfrak {I}(\cdot )\)

Imaginary component of a complex number

\((\cdot )^*\)

Conjugate of a complex number

\(|\cdot |\)

Magnitude of a complex number, \(l^2\)- norm

\(\angle \)

Angle of a complex number

\(x^u \)

Upper bound of variable x

\(x^l \)

Lower bound of variable x

\(\mathbf {x}\)

A constant value

Scheduling parameters

\(\varvec{p}^r_t\)

Global real power reserve requirement at time \(t \in \mathcal {T}\)

\(\varvec{u}^{su}_i, \varvec{u}^{sd}_i\)

Startup and shutdown cost of unit \(i\in N_G\) at time t

\(\varvec{\tau }^{tu}, \varvec{\tau }^{td}\)

Minimum up and minimum down time

Storage parameters

\(\varvec{\rho }^c_i, \varvec{\rho }^d_i\)

Charging and discharging efficiencies for a storage unit i

Facility location parameters

\(\varvec{\kappa }_i\)

Capacity of facility constructed at node i

\(\varvec{c}^f_i \)

Cost of constructing a facility at node i

\(\varvec{c}^l_{ij}\)

Cost of constructing link \((i, j) \in E\)

\(\varvec{c}^s_{ij}\)

Unit shipping cost on link \((i, j)\in E\)

\(\varvec{d}_i \)

Demand at node i

Power flow variables

I

AC current

\(V_i = e_i + \varvec{j} f_i\)

AC voltage at bus \(i \in N\) in rectangular form

\(V = {\left| {V}\right| } \angle \theta \)

AC voltage in polar form

W

Product of two AC voltages

\(S^g = p^g + \varvec{j} q^g\)

AC power generation

Switching and restoration variables

\(\lambda _{ij} \in \left\{ 0, 1\right\} \)

1 if the state of line (ij) is on; 0 otherwise

\(\beta _{i} \in \left\{ 0, 1\right\} \)

1 if bus i is fed; 0 otherwise

Storage sizing variables

\(S^s = p^s + \varvec{j} q^s \)

AC power injection at storage device.

\(\gamma _i \)

Capacity of power rating for storage unit i to be determined

\(\eta _i \)

Capacity of energy for storage unit i to be determined

\({\varDelta }_{it}\)

Storage change at time \(t \in \mathcal {T}\)

Scheduling variables

\(\delta ^{su}_{it}, ~\delta ^{sd}_{it}~\in \left\{ 0, 1\right\} \)

Startup or shutdown generator i at time \(t\in \mathcal {T}\)

\(\sigma ^g_{i} \in \left\{ 0, 1\right\} \)

1 if the state of generator i is on; 0 otherwise

\(p_{ijt}, q_{ijt}\)

Active, reactive power flow of branch (ij) at hour t

\(l_{ijt}\)

The square of current magnitude of branch (ij) at hour t

\(p^{ga}_{it}\)

Maximum real power available from generator i at time \(t \in \mathcal {T}\)

Facility location variables

\(y_{i} \in \left\{ 0, 1\right\} \)

1 if a facility is located at bus i, 0 otherwise

\(z_{ij} \in \left\{ 0, 1\right\} \)

1 if line (ij) is constructed; 0 otherwise

\(f_{ij}\)

Fictitious flow on link (ij)

\(p_i\)

Total production of the facility at node i

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the editors and anonymous referees for their helpful suggestions that greatly improved the quality of the paper. This research was partly funded by the Australia Indonesia Centre.

References

  1. 1.
    Adams, W.P., Sherali, H.D.: A tight linearization and an algorithm for zero-one quadratic programming problems. Manag. Sci. 32(10), 1274–1290 (1986).  https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.10.1274 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adams, W.P., Sherali, H.D.: Linearization strategies for a class of zero-one mixed integer programming problems. Oper. Res. 38(2), 217–226 (1990)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Adams, W.P., Sherali, H.D.: A hierarchy of relaxations leading to the convex hull representation for general discrete optimization problems. Ann. Oper. Res. 140(1), 21–47 (2005)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alarcon-Rodriguez, A., Ault, G., Galloway, S.: Multi-objective planning of distributed energy resources: a review of the state-of-the-art. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 14(5), 1353–1366 (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Alnaser, S.W., Ochoa, L.F.: Optimal sizing and control of energy storage in wind power-rich distribution networks. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 31(3), 2004–2013 (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Alsac, O., Bright, J., Prais, M., Stott, B.: Further developments in LP-based optimal power flow. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 5(3), 697–711 (1990)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Apostolopoulou, D., Sauer, P.W., Domínguez-Garcia, A.D.: Automatic generation control and its implementation in real time. In: 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), pp. 2444–2452. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Arroyo, J.M., Conejo, A.J.: Optimal response of a thermal unit to an electricity spot market. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 15(3), 1098–1104 (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ashraphijuo, M., Fattahi, S., Lavaei, J., Atamtürk, A.: A strong semidefinite programming relaxation of the unit commitment problem. In: 2016 IEEE 55th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), pp. 694–701. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aydin, N.Y., Kentel, E., Duzgun, H.S.: Gis-based site selection methodology for hybrid renewable energy systems: a case study from western turkey. Energy Convers. Manag. 70, 90–106 (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bacaud, L., Lemaréchal, C., Renaud, A., Sagastizábal, C.: Bundle methods in stochastic optimal power management: a disaggregated approach using preconditioners. Comput. Optim. Appl. 20(3), 227–244 (2001)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bai, X., Qu, L., Qiao, W.: Robust AC optimal power flow for power networks with wind power generation. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 31(5), 4163–4164 (2016)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bai, X., Wei, H., Fujisawa, K., Wang, Y.: Semidefinite programming for optimal power flow problems. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 30(6), 383–392 (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bakirtzis, A.G., Biskas, P.N.: A decentralized solution to the DC-OPF of interconnected power systems. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 18(3), 1007–1013 (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Banos, R., Manzano-Agugliaro, F., Montoya, F., Gil, C., Alcayde, A., Gómez, J.: Optimization methods applied to renewable and sustainable energy: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15(4), 1753–1766 (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Baran, M.E., Wu, F.F.: Network reconfiguration in distribution systems for loss reduction and load balancing. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 4(2), 1401–1407 (1989)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Barrows, C., Blumsack, S.: Transmission switching in the RTS-96 test system. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 27(2), 1134–1135 (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Barth, R., Brand, H., Meibom, P., Weber, C.: A stochastic unit-commitment model for the evaluation of the impacts of integration of large amounts of intermittent wind power. In: Probabilistic Methods Applied to Power Systems, 2006. International Conference on PMAPS 2006, pp. 1–8. IEEE (2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Barton, J.P., Infield, D.G.: Energy storage and its use with intermittent renewable energy. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 19(2), 441–448 (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Belotti, P., Kirches, C., Leyffer, S., Linderoth, J., Luedtke, J., Mahajan, A.: Mixed-integer nonlinear optimization. Acta Numer. 22, 1–131 (2013)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ben-Ameur, W., Ouorou, A., Wang, G.: Convex and concave envelopes: revisited and new perspectives. Oper. Res. Lett. 45(5), 421–426 (2017)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ben-Ameur, W., Ouorou, A., Wang, G., Żotkiewicz, M.: Multipolar robust optimization. EURO J. Comput. Optim. (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13675-017-0092-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ben-Tal, A., El Ghaoui, L., Nemirovski, A.: Robust Optimization. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2009)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ben-Tal, A., Goryashko, A., Guslitzer, E., Nemirovski, A.: Adjustable robust solutions of uncertain linear programs. Math. Program. 99(2), 351–376 (2004)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ben-Tal, A., Nemirovski, A.: Robust convex optimization. Math. Oper. Res. 23(4), 769–805 (1998)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ben-Tal, A., Nemirovski, A.: On polyhedral approximations of the second-order cone. Math. Oper. Res. 26(2), 193–205 (2001)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bertsimas, D., Brown, D.B., Caramanis, C.: Theory and applications of robust optimization. SIAM Rev. 53(3), 464–501 (2011)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bertsimas, D., Litvinov, E., Sun, X.A., Zhao, J., Zheng, T.: Adaptive robust optimization for the security constrained unit commitment problem. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28(1), 52–63 (2013)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bertsimas, D., Sim, M.: The price of robustness. Oper. Res. 52(1), 35–53 (2004)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bestuzheva, K., Hijazi, H., Coffrin, C.: Convex relaxations for quadratic on/off constraints and applications to optimal transmission switching. Optimization online preprint: http://www.optimization-online.org/DBFILE/2016/07/5565.pdf (2016). Accessed 05 May 2017
  31. 31.
    Bienstock, D., Chertkov, M., Harnett, S.: Chance-constrained optimal power flow: risk-aware network control under uncertainty. SIAM Rev. 56(3), 461–495 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bienstock, D., Verma, A.: Strong np-hardness of ac power flows feasibility. arXiv preprint arXiv:1512.07315 (2015)
  33. 33.
    Birge, J.R., Louveaux, F.: Introduction to Stochastic Programming. Springer, Berlin (2011)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Bonami, P., Kilin, M., Linderoth, J.: Algorithms and software for convex mixed integer nonlinear programs. In: Lee, J., Leyffer, S. (eds.) Mixed Integer Nonlinear Programming, The IMA Volumes in Mathematics and its Applications, vol. 154, pp. 1–39. Springer, New York (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-1927-3_1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bonami, P., Lee, J.: Bonmin users manual. Numer. Math. 4, 1–32 (2007)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bouffard, F., Galiana, F.D., Arroyo, J.M.: Umbrella contingencies in security-constrained optimal power flow. In: 15th Power Systems Computation Conference, PSCC, vol. 5 (2005)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Boyd, S., Vandenberghe, L.: Convex Optimization. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bukhsh, W.A., Grothey, A., McKinnon, K.I., Trodden, P.A.: Local solutions of the optimal power flow problem. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28(4), 4780–4788 (2013)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Burer, S., Letchford, A.N.: Non-convex mixed-integer nonlinear programming: a survey. Surv. Oper. Res. Manag. Sci. 17(2), 97–106 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sorms.2012.08.001 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Cao, Y., Tan, Y., Li, C., Rehtanz, C.: Chance-constrained optimization-based unbalanced optimal power flow for radial distribution networks. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 28(3), 1855–1864 (2013)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Capitanescu, F., Glavic, M., Ernst, D., Wehenkel, L.: Contingency filtering techniques for preventive security-constrained optimal power flow. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 22(4), 1690–1697 (2007)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Capitanescu, F., Ramos, J.M., Panciatici, P., Kirschen, D., Marcolini, A.M., Platbrood, L., Wehenkel, L.: State-of-the-art, challenges, and future trends in security constrained optimal power flow. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 81(8), 1731–1741 (2011)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Capitanescu, F., Wehenkel, L.: A new iterative approach to the corrective security-constrained optimal power flow problem. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 23(4), 1533–1541 (2008)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Capitanescu, F., Wehenkel, L.: Computation of worst operation scenarios under uncertainty for static security management. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28(2), 1697–1705 (2013)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Carpentier, J.: Contribution to the economic dispatch problem. Bull. Soc. Fr. Electr. 3(8), 431–447 (1962)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Carpentier, J.: Optimal power flows. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 1(1), 3–15 (1979)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Carpentier, P., Gohen, G., Culioli, J.C., Renaud, A.: Stochastic optimization of unit commitment: a new decomposition framework. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 11(2), 1067–1073 (1996)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Carr, S., Premier, G.C., Guwy, A.J., Dinsdale, R.M., Maddy, J.: Energy storage for active network management on electricity distribution networks with wind power. IET Renew. Power Gener. 8(3), 249–259 (2014)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Castillo, A., Laird, C., Silva-Monroy, C.A., Watson, J.P., ONeill, R.P.: The unit commitment problem with AC optimal power flow constraints. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 31(6), 4853–4866 (2016)Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W.: Chance-constrained programming. Manag. Sci. 6(1), 73–79 (1959)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Chen, B., Guignard, M.: Polyhedral analysis and decompositions for capacitated plant location-type problems. Discrete Appl. Math. 82(1–3), 79–91 (1998)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Chen, C., Atamtürk, A., Oren, S.S.: Bound tightening for the alternating current optimal power flow problem. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 31(5), 3729–3736 (2016)Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Chen, C., Atamtürk, A., Oren, S.S.: A spatial branch-and-cut method for nonconvex QCQP with bounded complex variables. Math. Program. 165, 549–577 (2017)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Chen, S., Gooi, H.B., Wang, M.: Sizing of energy storage for microgrids. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 3(1), 142–151 (2012)Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Chiang, N., Grothey, A.: Solving security constrained optimal power flow problems by a structure exploiting interior point method. Optim. Eng. 16(1), 49–71 (2015)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Coffrin, C., Hijazi, H., Van Hentenryck, P.: Strengthening the SDP relaxation of AC power flows with convex envelopes, bound tightening, and lifted nonlinear cuts. arXiv preprint arXiv:1512.04644 (2015)
  57. 57.
    Coffrin, C., Hijazi, H., Van Hentenryck, P.: Network flow and copper plate relaxations for ac transmission systems. In: Power Systems Computation Conference (PSCC), 2016, pp. 1–8. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Coffrin, C., Hijazi, H.L., Lehmann, K., Van Hentenryck, P.: Primal and dual bounds for optimal transmission switching. In: Power Systems Computation Conference (PSCC), 2014, pp. 1–8. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Coffrin, C., Hijazi, H.L., Van Hentenryck, P.: Distflow extensions for AC transmission systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.04773 (2015)
  60. 60.
    Coffrin, C., Hijazi, H.L., Van Hentenryck, P.: Strengthening convex relaxations with bound tightening for power network optimization. In: International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming, pp. 39–57. Springer (2015)Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Coffrin, C., Hijazi, H.L., Van Hentenryck, P.: The QC relaxation: a theoretical and computational study on optimal power flow. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 31(4), 3008–3018 (2016)Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Conejo, A.J., Carrión, M., Morales, J.M.: Decision Making Under Uncertainty in Electricity Markets, vol. 1. Springer, New York (2010)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Cplex, I.I.: 12.2 Users Manual. ILOG (2010)Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Damcı-Kurt, P., Küçükyavuz, S., Rajan, D., Atamtürk, A.: A polyhedral study of production ramping. Math. Program. 158(1–2), 175–205 (2016)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Dantzig, G.B.: Linear programming under uncertainty. Manag. Sci. 1(3–4), 197–206 (1955)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Delage, E., Iancu, D.: Robust multi-stage decision making. INFORMS Tutorials in Operations Research (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1287/educ.2015.0139 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Devi, A.L., Subramanyam, B.: Optimal dg unit placement for loss reduction in radial distribution system: a case study. ARPN J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2(6), 57–61 (2007)Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Dilkina, B., Gomes, C.P.: Solving connected subgraph problems in wildlife conservation. In: International Conference on Integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Operations Research (OR) Techniques in Constraint Programming, pp. 102–116. Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Duran, M.A., Grossmann, I.E.: An outer-approximation algorithm for a class of mixed-integer nonlinear programs. Math. Program. 36(3), 307–339 (1986)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Dvorkin, Y., Pandzic, H., Ortega-Vazquez, M., Kirschen, D.: A hybrid stochastic/interval approach to transmission-constrained unit commitment. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 30(2), 621–631 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2014.2331279 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    El-Ghaoui, L., Lebret, H.: Robust solutions to least-square problems to uncertain data matrices. Sima J. Matrix Anal. Appl. 18, 1035–1064 (1997)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    El Ghaoui, L., Oks, M., Oustry, F.: Worst-case value-at-risk and robust portfolio optimization: a conic programming approach. Oper. Res. 51(4), 543–556 (2003)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Erdinc, O., Uzunoglu, M.: Optimum design of hybrid renewable energy systems: overview of different approaches. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16(3), 1412–1425 (2012)Google Scholar
  74. 74.
    Esposito, A.G., Ramos, E.R.: Reliable load flow technique for radial distribution networks. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 14(3), 1063–1069 (1999)Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Fan, W., Guan, X., Zhai, Q.: A new method for unit commitment with ramping constraints. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 62(3), 215–224 (2002)Google Scholar
  76. 76.
    Farghal, S., Tantawy, M., Hussien, M.A., Hassan, S., Elela, A.A.: Fast technique for power system security assessment using sensitivity parameters of linear programming. IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst. 5, 946–953 (1984)Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Farivar, M., Clarke, C.R., Low, S.H., Chandy, K.M.: Inverter var control for distribution systems with renewables. In: 2011 IEEE International Conference on Smart Grid Communications (SmartGridComm), pp. 457–462. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Fattahi, S., Ashraphijuo, M., Lavaei, J., Atamtürk, A.: Conic relaxations of the unit commitment problem. Energy 134, 1079–1095 (2017)Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Fattahi, S., Lavaei, J., Atamtürk, A.: Promises of conic relaxations in optimal transmission switching of power systems. In: 56th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (2017)Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Fischetti, M., Ljubić, I., Sinnl, M.: Redesigning benders decomposition for large-scale facility location. Manag. Sci. 63, 2146–2162 (2016)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Fisher, E.B., O’Neill, R.P., Ferris, M.C.: Optimal transmission switching. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 23(3), 1346–1355 (2008)Google Scholar
  82. 82.
    Frangioni, A., Gentile, C.: Solving nonlinear single-unit commitment problems with ramping constraints. Oper. Res. 54(4), 767–775 (2006)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Frangioni, A., Gentile, C., Lacalandra, F.: Tighter approximated MILP formulations for unit commitment problems. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 24(1), 105–113 (2009)Google Scholar
  84. 84.
    Fu, Y., Li, Z., Wu, L.: Modeling and solution of the large-scale security-constrained unit commitment. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28(4), 3524–3533 (2013)Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Fu, Y., Shahidehpour, M., Li, Z.: Security-constrained unit commitment with AC constraints. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 20(3), 1538–1550 (2005)Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Fu, Y., Shahidehpour, M., Li, Z.: Ac contingency dispatch based on security-constrained unit commitment. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 21(2), 897–908 (2006)Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Fukuda, M., Kojima, M., Murota, K., Nakata, K.: Exploiting sparsity in semidefinite programming via matrix completion I: general framework. SIAM J. Optim. 11(3), 647–674 (2001)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Gabash, A., Li, P.: Flexible optimal operation of battery storage systems for energy supply networks. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28(3), 2788–2797 (2013)Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Gabrel, V., Murat, C., Thiele, A.: Recent advances in robust optimization: an overview. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 235(3), 471–483 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Gamarra, C., Guerrero, J.M.: Computational optimization techniques applied to microgrids planning: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 48, 413–424 (2015)Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Gentile, C., Morales-Espana, G., Ramos, A.: A tight MIP formulation of the unit commitment problem with start-up and shut-down constraints. EURO J. Comput. Optim. 5, 177–201 (2017)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Geoffrion, A.: Generalized benders decomposition. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 10(4), 237–260 (1972).  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00934810 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Geoffrion, A.M.: Generalized benders decomposition. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 10(4), 237–260 (1972)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Ghaddar, B., Marecek, J., Mevissen, M.: Optimal power flow as a polynomial optimization problem. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 31(1), 539–546 (2016)Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Glineur, F.: Computational experiments with a linear approximation of second order cone optimization. Technical Report, Service de Mathematique et de Recherche Operationnelle, Faculte Polytechnique de Mons, Mons, Belgium (2000)Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Goh, J., Sim, M.: Distributionally robust optimization and its tractable approximations. Oper. Res. 58(4–part–1), 902–917 (2010)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Granelli, G., Montagna, M.: Security-constrained economic dispatch using dual quadratic programming. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 56(1), 71–80 (2000)Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Granville, S., Lima, M.A.: Application of decomposition techniques to var planning: methodological and computational aspects. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 9(4), 1780–1787 (1994)Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Grone, R., Johnson, C.R., Sá, E.M., Wolkowicz, H.: Positive definite completions of partial hermitian matrices. Linear Algebra Appl. 58, 109–124 (1984)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Grossmann, I.E.: Review of nonlinear mixed-integer and disjunctive programming techniques. Optim. Eng. 3(3), 227–252 (2002)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Guan, Y., Wang, J.: Uncertainty sets for robust unit commitment. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 29(3), 1439–1440 (2014)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Guimaraes, M.A., Castro, C.A.: Reconfiguration of distribution systems for loss reduction using tabu search. IEEE Power System Computation Conference (PSCC), vol. 1, pp. 1–6 (2005)Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Gülpınar, N., Pachamanova, D., Çanakoğlu, E.: Robust strategies for facility location under uncertainty. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 225(1), 21–35 (2013)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Harsha, P., Dahleh, M.: Optimal management and sizing of energy storage under dynamic pricing for the efficient integration of renewable energy. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 30(3), 1164–1181 (2015)Google Scholar
  105. 105.
    Hedman, K.W., O’Neill, R.P., Fisher, E.B., Oren, S.S.: Optimal transmission switchingsensitivity analysis and extensions. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 23(3), 1469–1479 (2008)Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Hijazi, H., Bonami, P., Cornuéjols, G., Ouorou, A.: Mixed-integer nonlinear programs featuring on/off constraints. Comput. Optim. Appl. 52(2), 537–558 (2012)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Hijazi, H., Coffrin, C., Hentenryck, P.V.: Convex quadratic relaxations for mixed-integer nonlinear programs in power systems. Math. Program. Comput. 9(3), 321–367 (2017)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Hijazi, H., Coffrin, C., Van Hentenryck, P.: Polynomial SDP cuts for optimal power flow. In: Power Systems Computation Conference (PSCC), 2016, pp. 1–7. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Hijazi, H., Thiébaux, S.: Optimal distribution systems reconfiguration for radial and meshed grids. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 72, 136–143 (2015)Google Scholar
  110. 110.
    Huang, Y., Zheng, Q.P., Wang, J.: Two-stage stochastic unit commitment model including non-generation resources with conditional value-at-risk constraints. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 116, 427–438 (2014)Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    Irisarri, G., Housos, E.: Real and reactive power-system security dispatch using a variable weights optimization method. IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst. 5, 1260–1268 (1983)Google Scholar
  112. 112.
    Irving, M., Sterling, M.: Economic dispatch of active power with constraint relaxation. In: IEE Proceedings C (Generation, Transmission and Distribution), vol. 130, pp. 172–177. IET (1983)Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Jabr, R.: Adjustable robust OPF with renewable energy sources. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28(4), 4742–4751 (2013)Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Jabr, R., Karaki, S., Korbane, J.: Robust multi-period OPF with storage and renewables. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. PP(99), 1–10 (2014)Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Jabr, R.A.: Radial distribution load flow using conic programming. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 21(3), 1458–1459 (2006)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Jabr, R.A.: A conic quadratic format for the load flow equations of meshed networks. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 22(4), 2285–2286 (2007)Google Scholar
  117. 117.
    Jabr, R.A.: Optimal power flow using an extended conic quadratic formulation. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 23(3), 1000–1008 (2008)Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    Jabr, R.A.: Exploiting sparsity in SDP relaxations of the OPF problem. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 27(2), 1138–1139 (2012)Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Jabr, R.A.: Minimum loss operation of distribution networks with photovoltaic generation. IET Renew. Power Gener. 8(1), 33–44 (2014)Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    Jabr, R.A., Singh, R., Pal, B.C.: Minimum loss network reconfiguration using mixed-integer convex programming. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 27(2), 1106–1115 (2012)Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Jiang, R., Wang, J., Guan, Y.: Robust unit commitment with wind power and pumped storage hydro. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 27(2), 800–810 (2012)Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    Jiang, R., Wang, J., Zhang, M., Guan, Y.: Two-stage minimax regret robust unit commitment. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28(3), 2271–2282 (2013)Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Josz, C.: Application of polynomial optimization to electricity transmission networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.03871 (2016)
  124. 124.
    Josz, C., Fliscounakis, S., Maeght, J., Panciatici, P.: Ac power flow data in MATPOWER and QCQP format: itesla, rte snapshots, and pegase. arXiv preprint arXiv:1603.01533 (2016)
  125. 125.
    Josz, C., Maeght, J., Panciatici, P., Gilbert, J.C.: Application of the moment-SOS approach to global optimization of the OPF problem. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 30(1), 463–470 (2015)Google Scholar
  126. 126.
    Josz, C., Molzahn, D.K.: Moment/sum-of-squares hierarchy for complex polynomial optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1508.02068 (2015)
  127. 127.
    Josz, C., Molzahn, D.K.: Multi-ordered lasserre hierarchy for large scale polynomial optimization in real and complex variables. arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.04376 (2017)
  128. 128.
    Kall, P., Wallace, S.: Stochastic Programming. Wiley-Interscience Series in Systems and Optimization. Wiley, London (1994)Google Scholar
  129. 129.
    Khan, A.A., Naeem, M., Iqbal, M., Qaisar, S., Anpalagan, A.: A compendium of optimization objectives, constraints, tools and algorithms for energy management in microgrids. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 58, 1664–1683 (2016)Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    Khanabadi, M., Ghasemi, H., Doostizadeh, M.: Optimal transmission switching considering voltage security and \(\text{ n }-1\) contingency analysis. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28(1), 542–550 (2013)Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    Kim, J.H., Powell, W.B.: Optimal energy commitments with storage and intermittent supply. Oper. Res. 59(6), 1347–1360 (2011)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Kim, S., Kojima, M., Mevissen, M., Yamashita, M.: Exploiting sparsity in linear and nonlinear matrix inequalities via positive semidefinite matrix completion. Math. Program. 129(1), 33–68 (2011)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Kocuk, B.: Global optimization methods for optimal power flow and transmission switching problems in electric power systems. Ph.D. thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology (2016)Google Scholar
  134. 134.
    Kocuk, B., Dey, S.S., Sun, X.: New formulation and strong MISOCP relaxations for AC optimal transmission switching problem. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 32, 4161–4170 (2017)Google Scholar
  135. 135.
    Kocuk, B., Dey, S.S., Sun, X.A.: Strong SOCP relaxations for the optimal power flow problem. Oper. Res. 64(6), 1177–1196 (2016)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Kocuk, B., Dey, S.S., Sun, X.A.: Matrix minor reformulation and SOCP-based spatial branch-and-cut method for the AC optimal power flow problem. arXiv preprint arXiv:1703.03050 (2017)
  137. 137.
    Kocuk, B., Jeon, H., Dey, S.S., Linderoth, J., Luedtke, J., Sun, X.A.: A cycle-based formulation and valid inequalities for DC power transmission problems with switching. Oper. Res. 64(4), 922–938 (2016)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Krivine, J.: Anneaux preordonnes. J. Anal. Math. 12, 307–326 (1964)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Kuhn, D., Wiesemann, W., Georghiou, A.: Primal and dual linear decision rules in stochastic and robust optimization. Math. Program. 130(1), 177–209 (2011)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Lasserre, J.B.: Global optimization with polynomials and the problem of moments. SIAM J. Optim. 11(3), 796–817 (2001)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Lasserre, J.B.: Moments, Positive Polynomials and Their Applications, vol. 1. World Scientific, Singapore (2009)Google Scholar
  142. 142.
    Laurent, M.: A tour dhorizon on positive semidefinite and euclidean distance matrix completion problems. Top. Semidefin. Inter. Point Methods 18, 51–76 (1998)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  143. 143.
    Laurent, M.: Sums of squares, moment matrices and optimization over polynomials. In: Putinar, M., Sullivant, S. (eds.) Emerging Applications of Algebraic Geometry. The IMA Volumes in Mathematics and its Applications, vol. 149. Springer, New York, NY (2009)Google Scholar
  144. 144.
    Lavaei, J., Low, S.H.: Zero duality gap in optimal power flow problem. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 27(1), 92–107 (2012)Google Scholar
  145. 145.
    Lee, J., Leung, J., Margot, F.: Min-up/min-down polytopes. Discrete Optim. 1(1), 77–85 (2004)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  146. 146.
    Lehmann, K., Grastien, A., Van Hentenryck, P.: Ac-feasibility on tree networks is NP-hard. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 31(1), 798–801 (2016)Google Scholar
  147. 147.
    Li, Q., Ayyanar, R., Vittal, V.: Convex optimization for des planning and operation in radial distribution systems with high penetration of photovoltaic resources. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 7(3), 985–995 (2016)Google Scholar
  148. 148.
    Li, Q., Vittal, V.: Non-iterative enhanced SDP relaxations for optimal scheduling of distributed energy storage in distribution systems. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 32, 1721–1732 (2017)Google Scholar
  149. 149.
    Li, W., Shaaban, M., Yan, Z., Ni, Y., Wu, F.F.: Available transfer capability calculation with static security constraints. In: Power Engineering Society General Meeting, 2003, IEEE, vol. 1, pp. 306–310. IEEE (2003)Google Scholar
  150. 150.
    Li, Y., McCalley, J.D.: Decomposed SCOPF for improving efficiency. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 24(1), 494–495 (2009)Google Scholar
  151. 151.
    Liu, J., Castillo, A., Watson, J.P., Laird, C.D.: Global solution strategies for the network-constrained unit commitment (NCUC) problem with nonlinear AC transmission models. Available on Optimization Online (2017)Google Scholar
  152. 152.
    Liu, J., Liddell, A.C., Marecek, J., Takac, M.: Hybrid methods in solving alternating-current optimal power flows. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 8(6), 2988–2998 (2017)Google Scholar
  153. 153.
    Liu, J., Marecek, J., Simonetto, A., Takac, M.: A coordinate-descent algorithm for tracking solutions in time-varying optimal power flows. arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.07119 (2017)
  154. 154.
    Liu, Y., Ferris, M.C., Zhao, F.: Computational study of security constrained economic dispatch with multi-stage rescheduling. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 30(2), 920–929 (2015)Google Scholar
  155. 155.
    Lorca, A., Sun, X.A., Litvinov, E., Zheng, T.: Multistage adaptive robust optimization for the unit commitment problem. Oper. Res. 64(1), 32–51 (2016)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  156. 156.
    Louca, R., Bitar, E.: Stochastic ac optimal power flow with affine recourse. In: 2016 IEEE 55th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), pp. 2431–2436. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  157. 157.
    Louca, R., Bitar, E.: Robust AC optimal power flow. arXiv preprint arXiv:1706.09019 (2017)
  158. 158.
    Low, S.H.: Convex relaxation of optimal power flow-part I: formulations and equivalence. IEEE Trans. Control Netw. Syst. 1(1), 15–27 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  159. 159.
    Low, S.H.: Convex relaxation of optimal power flow-part II: exactness. IEEE Trans. Control Netw. Syst. 1(2), 177–189 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  160. 160.
    Lubin, M., Dunning, I.: Computing in operations research using Julia. INFORMS J. Comput. 27(2), 238–248 (2015)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  161. 161.
    Lubin, M., Dvorkin, Y., Backhaus, S.: A robust approach to chance constrained optimal power flow with renewable generation. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 31(5), 3840–3849 (2016)Google Scholar
  162. 162.
    Madani, R., Ashraphijuo, M., Lavaei, J.: OPF solver guide. URL http://www.ee.columbia.edu/~lavaei/Software.html (2014). Accessed 02 May 2017
  163. 163.
    Madani, R., Ashraphijuo, M., Lavaei, J.: Promises of conic relaxation for contingency-constrained optimal power flow problem. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 31(2), 1297–1307 (2016)Google Scholar
  164. 164.
    Madani, R., Atamturk, A., Davoudi, A.: A scalable semidefinite relaxation approach to grid scheduling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.03541 (2017)
  165. 165.
    Madani, R., Sojoudi, S., Lavaei, J.: Convex relaxation for optimal power flow problem: mesh networks. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 30(1), 199–211 (2015)Google Scholar
  166. 166.
    Magnanti, T.L., Wong, R.T., et al.: Decomposition methods for facility location problems. In: Working Paper (1986)Google Scholar
  167. 167.
    Mahat, P., Ongsakul, W., Mithulananthan, N.: Optimal placement of wind turbine DG in primary distribution systems for real loss reduction. In: Proceedings of Energy for Sustainable Development: Prospects and Issues for Asia, Phuket (2006)Google Scholar
  168. 168.
    Mareček, J., Takáč, M.: A low-rank coordinate-descent algorithm for semidefinite programming relaxations of optimal power flow. Optim. Methods Softw. 32, 849–871 (2017)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  169. 169.
    Martin, B., Glineur, F., De Jaeger, E.: A comparison of convex formulations for the joint planning of microgrids. In: International Conference and Exhibition on Electricity Distribution (CIRED) (accepted) (2017)Google Scholar
  170. 170.
    Martínez-Crespo, J., Usaola, J., Fernández, J.L.: Security-constrained optimal generation scheduling in large-scale power systems. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 21(1), 321–332 (2006)Google Scholar
  171. 171.
    McCormick, G.: Computability of global solutions to factorable nonconvex programs: part I—convex underestimating problems. Math. Program. 10(1), 147–175 (1976)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  172. 172.
    Melkote, S., Daskin, M.S.: Capacitated facility location/network design problems. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 129(3), 481–495 (2001)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  173. 173.
    Melkote, S., Daskin, M.S.: An integrated model of facility location and transportation network design. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 35(6), 515–538 (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  174. 174.
    Miller, B.L., Wagner, H.M.: Chance constrained programming with joint constraints. Oper. Res. 13(6), 930–945 (1965)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  175. 175.
    Miller, J.: Power system optimization smart grid, demand dispatch, and microgrids. Published online (2011)Google Scholar
  176. 176.
    Molzahn, D., Josz, C., Hiskens, I., Panciatici, P.: Solution of optimal power flow problems using moment relaxations augmented with objective function penalization. In: 2015 IEEE 54th Annual Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), pp. 31–38. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar
  177. 177.
    Molzahn, D.K., Hiskens, I.A.: Moment-based relaxation of the optimal power flow problem. In: Power Systems Computation Conference (PSCC), 2014, pp. 1–7. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  178. 178.
    Molzahn, D.K., Hiskens, I.A.: Sparsity-exploiting moment-based relaxations of the optimal power flow problem. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 30(6), 3168–3180 (2015)Google Scholar
  179. 179.
    Molzahn, D.K., Holzer, J.T., Lesieutre, B.C., DeMarco, C.L.: Implementation of a large-scale optimal power flow solver based on semidefinite programming. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28(4), 3987–3998 (2013)Google Scholar
  180. 180.
    Molzahn, D.K., Josz, C., Hiskens, I.A.: Moment relaxations of optimal power flow problems: beyond the convex hull. In: 2016 IEEE Global Conference on Signal and Information Processing (GlobalSIP), pp. 856–860. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  181. 181.
    Molzahn, D.K., Josz, C., Hiskens, I.A., Panciatici, P.: A laplacian-based approach for finding near globally optimal solutions to opf problems. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 32(1), 305–315 (2017)Google Scholar
  182. 182.
    Momoh, J.A., El-Hawary, M., Adapa, R.: A review of selected optimal power flow literature to 1993. II. Newton, linear programming and interior point methods. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 14(1), 105–111 (1999)Google Scholar
  183. 183.
    Monticelli, A., Pereira, M., Granville, S.: Security-constrained optimal power flow with post-contingency corrective rescheduling. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2(1), 175–180 (1987)Google Scholar
  184. 184.
    Moradi, M.H., Zeinalzadeh, A., Mohammadi, Y., Abedini, M.: An efficient hybrid method for solving the optimal sitting and sizing problem of DG and shunt capacitor banks simultaneously based on imperialist competitive algorithm and genetic algorithm. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 54, 101–111 (2014)Google Scholar
  185. 185.
    Morales-España, G., Latorre, J.M., Ramos, A.: Tight and compact milp formulation for the thermal unit commitment problem. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28(4), 4897–4908 (2013)Google Scholar
  186. 186.
    Morales-España, G., Latorre, J.M., Ramos, A.: Tight and compact milp formulation of start-up and shut-down ramping in unit commitment. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28(2), 1288–1296 (2013)Google Scholar
  187. 187.
    Mosek, A.: The MOSEK Optimization Toolbox for MATLAB Manual. Version 7.1 (Revision 49) p. 17 (2015)Google Scholar
  188. 188.
    Mota-Palomino, R., Quintana, V.: A penalty function-linear programming method for solving power system constrained economic operation problems. IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst. 6, 1414–1422 (1984)Google Scholar
  189. 189.
    Mota-Palomino, R., Quintana, V.: Sparse reactive power scheduling by a penalty function-linear programming technique. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 1(3), 31–39 (1986)Google Scholar
  190. 190.
    Nakata, K., Fujisawa, K., Fukuda, M., Kojima, M., Murota, K.: Exploiting sparsity in semidefinite programming via matrix completion II: implementation and numerical results. Math. Program. 95(2), 303–327 (2003)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  191. 191.
    Nemirovski, A., Shapiro, A.: Convex approximations of chance constrained programs. SIAM J. Optim. 17(4), 969–996 (2006)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  192. 192.
    Nick, M., Cherkaoui, R., Paolone, M.: Optimal allocation of dispersed energy storage systems in active distribution networks for energy balance and grid support. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 29(5), 2300–2310 (2014)Google Scholar
  193. 193.
    O’Neill, R.P., Baldick, R., Helman, U., Rothkopf, M.H., Stewart, W.: Dispatchable transmission in RTO markets. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 20(1), 171–179 (2005)Google Scholar
  194. 194.
    Ostrowski, J., Anjos, M.F., Vannelli, A.: Tight mixed integer linear programming formulations for the unit commitment problem. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 27(1), 39–46 (2012)Google Scholar
  195. 195.
    Overbye, T.J., Cheng, X., Sun, Y.: A comparison of the AC and DC power flow models for LMP calculations. In: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2004, pp. 9–pp. IEEE (2004)Google Scholar
  196. 196.
    Ozturk, U.A., Mazumdar, M., Norman, B.A.: A solution to the stochastic unit commitment problem using chance constrained programming. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 19(3), 1589–1598 (2004)Google Scholar
  197. 197.
    Parrilo, P.A.: Semidefinite programming relaxations for semialgebraic problems. Math. Program. 96(2), 293–320 (2003)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  198. 198.
    Phan, D.T.: Lagrangian duality and branch-and-bound algorithms for optimal power flow. Oper. Res. 60(2), 275–285 (2012)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  199. 199.
    Platbrood, L., Capitanescu, F., Merckx, C., Crisciu, H., Wehenkel, L.: A generic approach for solving nonlinear-discrete security-constrained optimal power flow problems in large-scale systems. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 29(3), 1194–1203 (2014)Google Scholar
  200. 200.
    Potluri, T., Hedman, K.W.: Impacts of topology control on the ACOPF. In: Power and Energy Society General Meeting, 2012 IEEE, pp. 1–7. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  201. 201.
    Powell, W.B., Meisel, S.: Tutorial on stochastic optimization in energy-part I: modeling and policies. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 31(2), 1459–1467 (2016)Google Scholar
  202. 202.
    Powell, W.B., Meisel, S.: Tutorial on stochastic optimization in energy-part II: an energy storage illustration. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 31(2), 1468–1475 (2016)Google Scholar
  203. 203.
    Pozo, D., Contreras, J.: A chance-constrained unit commitment with an \(nk\) security criterion and significant wind generation. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28(3), 2842–2851 (2013)Google Scholar
  204. 204.
    Pozo, D., Contreras, J., Sauma, E.E.: Unit commitment with ideal and generic energy storage units. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 29(6), 2974–2984 (2014)Google Scholar
  205. 205.
    Prekopa, A.: On probabilistic constrained programming. In: Proceedings of the Princeton Symposium on Mathematical Programming, pp. 113–138 (1970)Google Scholar
  206. 206.
    Purchala, K., Meeus, L., Van Dommelen, D., Belmans, R.: Usefulness of DC power flow for active power flow analysis. In: Power Engineering Society General Meeting, 2005. IEEE, pp. 454–459. IEEE (2005)Google Scholar
  207. 207.
    Putinar, M.: Positive polynomials on compact semi-algebraic sets. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 42(3), 969–984 (1993)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  208. 208.
    Quesada, I., Grossmann, I.E.: An LP/NLP based branch and bound algorithm for convex minlp optimization problems. Comput. Chem. Eng. 16(10–11), 937–947 (1992)Google Scholar
  209. 209.
    Rajan, D., Takriti, S.: Minimum up/down polytopes of the unit commitment problem with start-up costs. In: IBM Res. Rep (2005)Google Scholar
  210. 210.
    Roald, L., Misra, S., Krause, T., Andersson, G.: Corrective control to handle forecast uncertainty: a chance constrained optimal power flow. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 32(2), 1626–1637 (2017)Google Scholar
  211. 211.
    Roald, L., Oldewurtel, F., Krause, T., Andersson, G.: Analytical reformulation of security constrained optimal power flow with probabilistic constraints. In: IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  212. 212.
    Roald, L., Oldewurtel, F., Van Parys, B., Andersson, G.: Security constrained optimal power flow with distributionally robust chance constraints. arXiv preprint arXiv:1508.06061 (2015)
  213. 213.
    Rolim, J.G., Machado, L.J.B.: A study of the use of corrective switching in transmission systems. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 14(1), 336–341 (1999)Google Scholar
  214. 214.
    Ruiz, P.A., Philbrick, C.R., Sauer, P.W.: Modeling approaches for computational cost reduction in stochastic unit commitment formulations. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 25(1), 588–589 (2010)Google Scholar
  215. 215.
    Ruiz, P.A., Philbrick, C.R., Zak, E., Cheung, K.W., Sauer, P.W.: Uncertainty management in the unit commitment problem. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 24(2), 642–651 (2009)Google Scholar
  216. 216.
    Sahinidis, N.V.: BARON: a general purpose global optimization software package. J. Glob. Optim. 8(2), 201–205 (1996)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  217. 217.
    Santos-Neito, M., Quintana, V.: Linear reactive power studies for longitudinal power systems. In: Proceedings of 9th Power Systems Computation Conference, pp. 783–787 (1987)Google Scholar
  218. 218.
    Schlueter, R., Liu, S., Alemadi, N.: Preventive and corrective open access system dispatch based on the voltage stability security assessment and diagnosis. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 60(1), 17–28 (2001)Google Scholar
  219. 219.
    Scioletti, M.S., Newman, A.M., Goodman, J.K., Zolan, A.J., Leyffer, S.: Optimal design and dispatch of a system of diesel generators, photovoltaics and batteries for remote locations. Optim. Eng. 18, 755–792 (2017)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  220. 220.
    Shapiro, A., Nemirovski, A.: On complexity of stochastic programming problems. In: Jeyakumar, V., Rubinov, A. (eds.) Continuous Optimization: Current Trends and Modern Applications, pp. 111–146. Springer, US, Boston, MA (2005)Google Scholar
  221. 221.
    Shen, C., Laughton, M.: Power-system load scheduling with security constraints using dual linear programming. In: Proceedings of the Institution of Electrical Engineers, vol. 117, pp. 2117–2127. IET (1970)Google Scholar
  222. 222.
    Shi, J., Qiao, Y., Wang, Y., Wen, J., Tong, J., Zhang, J.: The planning of distribution network containing distributed generators based on mixed integer linear programming. In: 2015 5th International Conference on Electric Utility Deregulation and Restructuring and Power Technologies (DRPT), pp. 449–453. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar
  223. 223.
    Shor, N.Z.: Quadratic optimization problems. Tekhnicheskaya Kibernetika 1, 128–139 (1987)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  224. 224.
    Snyder, L.V.: Facility location under uncertainty: a review. IIE Trans. 38(7), 547–564 (2006)Google Scholar
  225. 225.
    Soyster, A.L.: Technical noteconvex programming with set-inclusive constraints and applications to inexact linear programming. Oper. Res. 21(5), 1154–1157 (1973)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  226. 226.
    Stadlin, W., Fletcher, D.: Voltage versus reactive current model for dispatch and control. IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst. 10, 3751–3760 (1982)Google Scholar
  227. 227.
    Stott, B., Alsac, O.: Fast decoupled load flow. IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst. 3, 859–869 (1974)Google Scholar
  228. 228.
    Stott, B., Hobson, E.: Power system security control calculations using linear programming, part I. IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst. 5, 1713–1720 (1978)Google Scholar
  229. 229.
    Stott, B., Jardim, J., Alsaç, O.: DC power flow revisited. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 24(3), 1290–1300 (2009)Google Scholar
  230. 230.
    Stott, B., Marinho, J.: Linear programming for power-system network security applications. IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst. 3, 837–848 (1979)Google Scholar
  231. 231.
    Summers, T., Warrington, J., Morari, M., Lygeros, J.: Stochastic optimal power flow based on convex approximations of chance constraints. In: Power Systems Computation Conference (PSCC), 2014, pp. 1–7. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  232. 232.
    Sun, X.A., Lorca, Á.: Robust optimization in electric power systems operations. In: Du, P., Baldick, R., Tuohy, A. (eds.) Integration of Large-Scale Renewable Energy into Bulk Power Systems, pp. 227–258. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2017)Google Scholar
  233. 233.
    Tahanan, M., Van Ackooij, W., Frangioni, A., Lacalandra, F.: Large-scale unit commitment under uncertainty. 4OR 13(2), 115–171 (2015)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  234. 234.
    Taheri, M.H., Dehghan, S., Heidarifar, M., Ghasemi, H.: Adaptive robust optimal transmission switching considering the uncertainty of net nodal electricity demands. IEEE Syst. J. 11, 2872–2881 (2015)Google Scholar
  235. 235.
    Takriti, S., Birge, J.R., Long, E.: A stochastic model for the unit commitment problem. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 11(3), 1497–1508 (1996)Google Scholar
  236. 236.
    Taylor, J.A., Hover, F.S.: Lift-and-project relaxations of AC microgrid distribution system planning. In: Proceedings of the 2011 Grand Challenges on Modeling and Simulation Conference, pp. 187–191. Society for Modeling & Simulation International (2011)Google Scholar
  237. 237.
    Taylor, J.A., Hover, F.S.: Convex models of distribution system reconfiguration. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 27(3), 1407–1413 (2012)Google Scholar
  238. 238.
    Usaola, J.: Probabilistic load flow with wind production uncertainty using cumulants and Cornish–Fisher expansion. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 31(9), 474–481 (2009)Google Scholar
  239. 239.
    Venzke, A., Halilbasic, L., Markovic, U., Hug, G., Chatzivasileiadis, S.: Convex relaxations of chance constrained AC optimal power flow. arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.08372 (2017)
  240. 240.
    Verma, A.: Power grid security analysis: an optimization approach. Ph.D. thesis, Columbia University (2009)Google Scholar
  241. 241.
    Viral, R., Khatod, D.: Optimal planning of distributed generation systems in distribution system: a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16(7), 5146–5165 (2012)Google Scholar
  242. 242.
    Vrakopoulou, M., Margellos, K., Lygeros, J., Andersson, G.: Probabilistic guarantees for the n-1 security of systems with wind power generation. In: Billinton, R., Karki, R., Verma, A.K. (eds.) Reliability and Risk Evaluation of Wind Integrated Power Systems, pp. 59–73. Springer, India (2013)Google Scholar
  243. 243.
    Wade, N., Taylor, P., Lang, P., Svensson, J.: Energy storage for power flow management and voltage control on an 11kv UK distribution network. In: 20th International Conference and Exhibition on Electricity Distribution-Part 1, 2009. CIRED 2009, pp. 1–4. IET (2009)Google Scholar
  244. 244.
    Waki, H., Kim, S., Kojima, M., Muramatsu, M.: Sums of squares and semidefinite program relaxations for polynomial optimization problems with structured sparsity. SIAM J. Optim. 17(1), 218–242 (2006)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  245. 245.
    Wang, G.: Relaxations in mixed-integer quadratically constrained programming and robust programming. Ph.D. thesis, EVRY, Institut national des télécommunications (2016)Google Scholar
  246. 246.
    Wang, G., Ben-Ameur, W., Neto, J., Ouorou, A.: Optimal mapping of cloud virtual machines. In: INOC 2015 7th International Network Optimization Conference. Electronic Notes in Discrete Mathematics, vol. 52, pp. 93–100 (2016)Google Scholar
  247. 247.
    Wang, S., Shahidehpour, S., Kirschen, D., Mokhtari, S., Irisarri, G.: Short-term generation scheduling with transmission and environmental constraints using an augmented lagrangian relaxation. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 10(3), 1294–1301 (1995)Google Scholar
  248. 248.
    Wang, Y., Xia, Q., Kang, C.: Unit commitment with volatile node injections by using interval optimization. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 26(3), 1705–1713 (2011)Google Scholar
  249. 249.
    Wen, Y., Guo, C., Pandzic, H., Kirschen, D.S.: Enhanced security-constrained unit commitment with emerging utility-scale energy storage. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 31(1), 652–662 (2016)Google Scholar
  250. 250.
    Wiesemann, W., Kuhn, D., Sim, M.: Distributionally robust convex optimization. Oper. Res. 62(6), 1358–1376 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  251. 251.
    Wogrin, S., Gayme, D.F.: Optimizing storage siting, sizing, and technology portfolios in transmission-constrained networks. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 30(6), 3304–3313 (2015)Google Scholar
  252. 252.
    Wolkowicz, H., Saigal, R., Vandenberghe, L.: Handbook of Semidefinite Programming: Theory, Algorithms, and Applications, vol. 27. Springer, Berlin (2012)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  253. 253.
    Wood, A.J., Wollenberg, B.F.: Power Generation, Operation, and Control. Wiley, London (2012)Google Scholar
  254. 254.
    Wu, L., Shahidehpour, M., Li, T.: Stochastic security-constrained unit commitment. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 22(2), 800–811 (2007)Google Scholar
  255. 255.
    Wu, L., Shahidehpour, M., Li, Z.: Comparison of scenario-based and interval optimization approaches to stochastic SCUC. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 27(2), 913–921 (2012)Google Scholar
  256. 256.
    Wu, L.Y., Zhang, X.S., Zhang, J.L.: Capacitated facility location problem with general setup cost. Comput. Oper. Res. 33(5), 1226–1241 (2006)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  257. 257.
    Yamin, H., Al-Agtash, S., Shahidehpour, M.: Security-constrained optimal generation scheduling for gencos. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 19(3), 1365–1372 (2004)Google Scholar
  258. 258.
    Yıldız, S., Kılınç-Karzan, F.: Low-complexity relaxations and convex hulls of disjunctions on the positive semidefinite cone and general regular cones. Optimization Online (2016)Google Scholar
  259. 259.
    Zeng, B., Zhao, L.: Solving two-stage robust optimization problems using a column-and-constraint generation method. Oper. Res. Lett. 41(5), 457–461 (2013)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  260. 260.
    Zhang, H., Li, P.: Chance constrained programming for optimal power flow under uncertainty. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 26(4), 2417–2424 (2011)Google Scholar
  261. 261.
    Zhang, S., Song, Y., Hu, Z., Yao, L.: Robust optimization method based on scenario analysis for unit commitment considering wind uncertainties. In: Power and Energy Society General Meeting, 2011 IEEE, pp. 1–7. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  262. 262.
    Zhang, Y., Gatsis, N., Giannakis, G.B.: Robust energy management for microgrids with high-penetration renewables. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 4(4), 944–953 (2013)Google Scholar
  263. 263.
    Zhang, Y., Shen, S., Mathieu, J.L.: Distributionally robust chance-constrained optimal power flow with uncertain renewables and uncertain reserves provided by loads. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 32(2), 1378–1388 (2017)Google Scholar
  264. 264.
    Zhang, Y., Wang, J., Zeng, B., Hu, Z.: Chance-constrained two-stage unit commitment under uncertain load and wind power output using bilinear benders decomposition. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 32, 3637–3647 (2017)Google Scholar
  265. 265.
    Zhao, C., Guan, Y.: Unified stochastic and robust unit commitment. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 28(3), 3353–3361 (2013)Google Scholar
  266. 266.
    Zhao, L., Zeng, B.: Robust unit commitment problem with demand response and wind energy. In: Power and Energy Society General Meeting, 2012 IEEE, pp. 1–8. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  267. 267.
    Zheng, Q.P., Wang, J., Liu, A.L.: Stochastic optimization for unit commitment: a review. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 30(4), 1913–1924 (2015)Google Scholar
  268. 268.
    Zou, J., Ahmed, S., Xu, A.S.: Multistage stochastic unit commitment using stochastic dual dynamic integer programming. Optimization onlineGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The Australian National UniversityCanberraAustralia
  2. 2.Los Alamos National LaboratoryLos AlamosUSA

Personalised recommendations