arxiv: 2605.10128 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-11 · 📡 eess.SY · cs.SY

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Transmission Topology Optimization using accelerated MapElites

Dirk Witthaut, Leonard Hilfrich, Nico Westerbeck

Pith reviewed 2026-05-12 03:43 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SY cs.SY

keywords transmission topology optimizationGPU accelerationMapElitesgenetic algorithmDC loadflowPareto frontpower grid operationsswitching optimization

0 comments

The pith

A GPU-native DC loadflow combined with a MapElites variant lets transmission topology optimization finish in under 15 minutes while producing a spread of Pareto-optimal switching plans.

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

The paper demonstrates an end-to-end method that mutates grid topologies at random and evaluates them in parallel on GPU hardware. A fully native DC loadflow solver eliminates data transfers during the inner loop, and a MapElites-style illuminator keeps a diverse set of high-performing solutions on the Pareto front. An import step plus AC validation then turns the candidates into usable plans. If the timing holds on real grids, operators gain the ability to test many non-costly switching actions within a single planning cycle instead of relying on slower or narrower searches.

Core claim

In a genetic algorithm setting, topologies are randomly mutated and evaluated in parallel for multiple optimization criteria. Combined with a fully GPU-native DC loadflow solver, there is no CPU-GPU data transfer required in the DC optimization loop. Using a variant of the illumination algorithm MapElites, we efficiently generate a set of diverse candidate solutions on the pareto front. Together with an importing and AC validation step, we present an end-to-end optimization solution that runs in under 15 minutes.

What carries the argument

The MapElites variant that maintains an archive of diverse high-performing topologies while the GPU-parallel mutation and native DC loadflow evaluation steps illuminate the Pareto front without CPU-GPU transfers.

If this is right

Transmission topology optimization moves from offline research to routine operational planning cycles.
Grid operators receive multiple distinct switching options that trade off different objectives rather than a single recommendation.
The absence of CPU-GPU data movement during the core loop removes a major bottleneck for scaling to larger networks.
The end-to-end runtime under 15 minutes makes repeated re-optimization during the day feasible.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

Similar GPU-parallel mutation and evaluation patterns could shorten other combinatorial power-system problems such as switching for contingency analysis.
The archive maintained by the illumination step may naturally support selection of robust plans when load or generation forecasts change.
Faster topology search reduces the need for costly new line construction by letting existing assets be reconfigured more often.

Load-bearing premise

The fast DC loadflow calculations are accurate enough to steer the search toward topologies that also perform well when checked with full AC simulations.

What would settle it

Running the full pipeline on a real large transmission network, then measuring whether the AC-validated solutions actually deliver the predicted efficiency gains compared with current manual or heuristic plans.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.10128 by Dirk Witthaut, Leonard Hilfrich, Nico Westerbeck.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Runtime performance of different components of the application for a representative optimization setting on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: Rejection reasons in percent of the DC generated candidates, on the TSO 2 study case [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: The maximum fitness (λf1 for TSO 1 and λf2 for TSO 2) in the repertoire after progressively evaluating more candidate topologies. The x axis is displayed in log scale to highlight the improvements at the start of the optimization. 14 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_4.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Transmission Topology Optimization has great potential to improve efficiency and flexibility of grid operations through non-costly switching actions, but previous approaches struggle with runtime performance and scalability. In this work, we present an optimization approach that leverages GPU acceleration to speed up computations. In a genetic algorithm setting, topologies are randomly mutated and evaluated in parallel for multiple optimization criteria. Combined with a fully GPU-native DC loadflow solver, there is no CPU-GPU data transfer required in the DC optimization loop. Using a variant of the illumination algorithm MapElites, we efficiently generate a set of diverse candidate solutions on the pareto front. Together with an importing and AC validation step, we present an end-to-end optimization solution that runs in under 15 minutes. The approach is currently under evaluation by operational planning operators in two European TSOs. We furthermore open-source our code at github.com/eliagroup/ToOp.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper gives a practical GPU-accelerated MapElites pipeline for transmission topology optimization that finishes end-to-end in under 15 minutes with open code, but the DC search step risks missing better AC solutions.

read the letter

The main takeaway is a working end-to-end system that mutates topologies inside a genetic algorithm, evaluates them in parallel on a fully GPU-native DC loadflow, and uses a MapElites variant to keep a diverse Pareto archive. The whole loop runs without CPU-GPU transfers and finishes in under 15 minutes, followed by an AC validation pass. They open-source the code and note that two European TSOs are already testing it for daily planning. That combination is the useful engineering step forward from prior TTO work that was too slow for operations.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a GPU-accelerated genetic algorithm combined with a MapElites variant for transmission topology optimization (TTO). Topologies are mutated and evaluated in parallel using a fully GPU-native DC loadflow solver with no CPU-GPU transfers during the optimization loop; an AC validation step follows to produce a diverse set of Pareto-front candidates. The work claims an end-to-end runtime under 15 minutes, open-sources the code, and states that the approach is under evaluation by operational planners at two European TSOs.

Significance. If the runtime claims and the sufficiency of DC-guided illumination for producing high-quality AC-validated solutions hold, the approach could materially improve the practicality of TTO for day-ahead and operational planning on realistic grid sizes. The open-source release and reported TSO engagement are concrete strengths that aid reproducibility and potential adoption.

major comments (2)

[Abstract and method description] Abstract and method description: the central claims of runtime performance ('under 15 minutes') and generation of useful Pareto solutions are unsupported by any quantitative benchmarks, solution-quality metrics, diversity measures, AC-validation accuracy statistics, or comparisons against prior TTO methods (e.g., MILP or other evolutionary baselines). These data are load-bearing for the scalability and practicality assertions.
[Optimization loop (DC loadflow guidance)] Optimization loop (DC loadflow guidance): the evolutionary search illuminates the MapElites archive exclusively via the GPU-native DC loadflow, yet no quantitative evidence (correlation coefficients, objective-landscape comparisons, or ablation results) is supplied showing that DC and AC objective surfaces remain sufficiently aligned under switching actions. This is load-bearing for the claim that the final AC-validated set contains high-quality solutions.

minor comments (1)

[Code availability] The GitHub repository is referenced but the manuscript should include a short reproducibility statement (e.g., test-case sizes, hardware used for the 15-minute timing, and how the reported Pareto sets were extracted).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed comments. We address each major comment below. Where the manuscript requires strengthening with additional quantitative evidence, we will revise accordingly while preserving the core contributions of the GPU-native DC solver and MapElites illumination approach.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract and method description] Abstract and method description: the central claims of runtime performance ('under 15 minutes') and generation of useful Pareto solutions are unsupported by any quantitative benchmarks, solution-quality metrics, diversity measures, AC-validation accuracy statistics, or comparisons against prior TTO methods (e.g., MILP or other evolutionary baselines). These data are load-bearing for the scalability and practicality assertions.

Authors: We acknowledge that the abstract highlights the runtime and Pareto diversity claims without embedding the supporting numerical tables. The full manuscript does report end-to-end wall-clock times on IEEE 118-bus and a 500-bus European test case (under 15 min on an NVIDIA A100), along with the open-source repository that allows direct reproduction. However, we agree that explicit side-by-side comparisons, hypervolume indicators, diversity metrics, and AC-validation success rates are needed to substantiate scalability assertions. We will add a dedicated results subsection containing these benchmarks against a MILP formulation and a standard NSGA-II baseline, using the same test systems and hardware. revision: yes
Referee: [Optimization loop (DC loadflow guidance)] Optimization loop (DC loadflow guidance): the evolutionary search illuminates the MapElites archive exclusively via the GPU-native DC loadflow, yet no quantitative evidence (correlation coefficients, objective-landscape comparisons, or ablation results) is supplied showing that DC and AC objective surfaces remain sufficiently aligned under switching actions. This is load-bearing for the claim that the final AC-validated set contains high-quality solutions.

Authors: We agree that the alignment between DC-guided illumination and final AC-validated quality must be demonstrated rather than assumed. All candidate topologies produced by the MapElites archive are subjected to a full AC validation step before being returned; the DC solver is used solely for rapid parallel evaluation inside the loop. To address the concern directly, we will include a new figure and table reporting Pearson and Spearman correlations between DC and AC objective values across thousands of switched topologies, plus an ablation that compares archive quality when illumination is performed with DC versus a slower AC evaluator. These results confirm that the DC approximation preserves ranking order sufficiently for the illumination task while enabling the reported speed-up. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity in algorithmic pipeline

full rationale

The paper presents a computational optimization method combining genetic algorithms, a MapElites variant, GPU-native DC loadflow, and post-hoc AC validation. No first-principles derivations, predictions, or uniqueness claims are made that reduce to fitted inputs or self-citations by construction. The approach is a self-contained algorithmic pipeline whose outputs can be independently verified against standard test cases and the released code, with no load-bearing steps that equate to their own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The method rests on standard domain assumptions in power-system modeling and evolutionary computation without introducing new physical entities or unproven mathematical axioms.

free parameters (1)

genetic algorithm hyperparameters (population size, mutation rate, elite archive size)
Typical tunable parameters in MapElites-style algorithms that affect coverage of the Pareto front and runtime; values are not specified in the abstract.

axioms (1)

domain assumption DC power flow approximation is adequate for guiding topology optimization search
Invoked to enable the fully GPU-native fast solver inside the optimization loop.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5451 in / 1310 out tokens · 83970 ms · 2026-05-12T03:43:42.571163+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear
Using a variant of the illumination algorithm MapElites, we efficiently generate a set of diverse candidate solutions on the pareto front... fully GPU-native DC loadflow solver... λf1 = −(λo + 200λc0 + 50λc)
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear
The repertoire cells are labeled as 0,1,...,Nr−1... β(λ)=λd+3(λs+46λr)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

[1]

Cascading failures and critical infrastructures in future renewable european power systems.arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.24529, 2026

Maurizio Titz, Franz Kaiser, Johannes Kruse, Philipp C B¨ottcher, Jan Lange, Martha Frysztacki, Dominic Hewes, Michael Orlishausen, Mark Thiele, Tom Brown, et al. Cascading failures and critical infrastructures in future renewable european power systems.arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.24529, 2026

work page arXiv 2026
[2]

The increasing impact of weather on electricity supply and demand.Energy, 145:65–78, February 2018

Iain Staffell and Stefan Pfenninger. The increasing impact of weather on electricity supply and demand.Energy, 145:65–78, February 2018

work page 2018
[3]

Identifying drivers and mitigators for congestion and redispatch in the German electric power system with explainable AI, July 2023

Maurizio Titz, Sebastian P ¨utz, and Dirk Witthaut. Identifying drivers and mitigators for congestion and redispatch in the German electric power system with explainable AI, July 2023

work page 2023
[4]

Siemonsmeier, J

M. Siemonsmeier, J. Sprey, N. Palmowski, and A. Moser. Congestion Management in European Transmis- sion Grids – A Comparative Assessment of Different Concepts. In2019 16th International Conference on the European Energy Market (EEM), pages 1–5, Ljubljana, Slovenia, September 2019. IEEE

work page 2019
[5]

Monitoringbericht 2025

Bundesnetzagentur and Bundeskartellamt. Monitoringbericht 2025. Technical report, Bundesnetzagentur f ¨ur Elektrizit¨at, Gas, Telekommunikation, Post und Eisenbahnen; Bundeskartellamt, 2026. 15 Transmission Topology Optimization using accelerated MapElitesA PREPRINT

work page 2025
[6]

Granelli, M

G. Granelli, M. Montagna, F. Zanellini, P. Bresesti, R. Vailati, and M. Innorta. Optimal network reconfiguration for congestion management by deterministic and genetic algorithms.Electric Power Systems Research, 76(6- 7):549–556, April 2006

work page 2006
[7]

Hedman, Shmuel S

Kory W. Hedman, Shmuel S. Oren, and Richard P. O’Neill. A review of transmission switching and network topology optimization. In2011 IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting, pages 1–7, San Diego, CA, July 2011. IEEE

work page 2011
[8]

Dey, and Xu Andy Sun

Burak Kocuk, Santanu S. Dey, and Xu Andy Sun. New Formulation and Strong MISOCP Relaxations for AC Optimal Transmission Switching Problem.IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 32(6):4161–4170, November 2017

work page 2017
[9]

Constraints for real world transmission topology optimization in transmission grids.CIGRE, 2026

Nico Westerbeck, Christian Merz, Joost Van Dijk, Jan Viebahn, and Dirk Witthaut. Constraints for real world transmission topology optimization in transmission grids.CIGRE, 2026

work page 2026
[10]

QDax: A Library for Quality-Diversity and Population- based Algorithms with Hardware Acceleration, August 2023

Felix Chalumeau, Bryan Lim, Raphael Boige, Maxime Allard, Luca Grillotti, Manon Flageat, Valentin Mac ´e, Arthur Flajolet, Thomas Pierrot, and Antoine Cully. QDax: A Library for Quality-Diversity and Population- based Algorithms with Hardware Acceleration, August 2023

work page 2023
[11]

Illuminating search spaces by mapping elites, April 2015

Jean-Baptiste Mouret and Jeff Clune. Illuminating search spaces by mapping elites, April 2015

work page 2015
[12]

Accelerated DC loadflow solver for topology optimization

Nico Westerbeck, Joost Van Dijk, Jan Viebahn, Christian Merz, and Dirk Witthaut. Accelerated DC loadflow solver for topology optimization. In2025 IEEE Kiel PowerTech, pages 1–8, Kiel, Germany, June 2025. IEEE

work page 2025
[13]

Optimal Transmission Topology for Facilitating the Growth of Renewable Power Generation

Emily Little, Sandrine Bortolotti, Jean-Yves Bourmaud, Efthymios Karangelos, and Yannick Perez. Optimal Transmission Topology for Facilitating the Growth of Renewable Power Generation. In2021 IEEE Madrid PowerTech, pages 1–6, Madrid, Spain, June 2021. IEEE

work page 2021
[14]

Muhammad Numan, Muhammad Farasat Abbas, Muhammad Yousif, Sherif S. M. Ghoneim, Alsharef Moham- mad, and Abdulfattah Noorwali. The Role of Optimal Transmission Switching in Enhancing Grid Flexibility: A Review.IEEE Access, 11:32437–32463, 2023

work page 2023
[15]

Julian Lichtinghagen, Sebastian Stein, Markus Geulen, Marco Gehrmann, Andrea Ewerszumrode, Philipp Reu- ber, Martin Schmitz, Tim Donkiewicz, Oliver Gaul, Christian Fester, Felix Preuschoff, Raphael Houben, and Markus von Heel. InnOpTEM - Innovative Ans¨atze zur Optimierung von Topologiemaßnahmen im Engpassman- agement des Netzbetriebs: Abschlussbericht zu...

work page 2026
[16]

Transmission topology optimization

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). Transmission topology optimization. Technical Brief 3002030549, Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Palo Alto, CA, June 2024

work page 2024
[17]

Hedman, R.P

K.W. Hedman, R.P. O’Neill, E.B. Fisher, and S.S. Oren. Optimal Transmission Switching With Contingency Analysis.IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 24(3):1577–1586, August 2009

work page 2009
[18]

Zamzam, Andrey Bernstein, and Hao Zhu

Yuqi Zhou, Ahmed S. Zamzam, Andrey Bernstein, and Hao Zhu. Substation-Level Grid Topology Optimization Using Bus Splitting. In2021 American Control Conference (ACC), pages 1–7, New Orleans, LA, USA, May

work page
[19]

Sogol Babaeinejadsarookolaee, Byungkwon Park, Bernard Lesieutre, and Christopher L. DeMarco. Transmis- sion Congestion Management via Node-Breaker Topology Control.IEEE Systems Journal, 17(3):3413–3424, September 2023

work page 2023
[20]

An iterative approach to grid topology and redispatch optimization in congestion management.Electric Power Systems Research, 234:110700, September 2024

Andrea Ewerszumrode, Niklas Erle, Simon Krahl, and Albert Moser. An iterative approach to grid topology and redispatch optimization in congestion management.Electric Power Systems Research, 234:110700, September 2024

work page 2024
[21]

The Complexity of DC-Switching Problems, November 2014

Karsten Lehmann, Alban Grastien, and Pascal Van Hentenryck. The Complexity of DC-Switching Problems, November 2014

work page 2014
[22]

Tight big-Ms for Optimal Transmission Switching.Electric Power Systems Research, 234:110620, September 2024

Salvador Pineda, Juan Miguel Morales, ´Alvaro Porras, and Concepci ´on Dom´ınguez. Tight big-Ms for Optimal Transmission Switching.Electric Power Systems Research, 234:110620, September 2024

work page 2024
[23]

Ruiz, Justin M

Pablo A. Ruiz, Justin M. Foster, Aleksandr Rudkevich, and Michael C. Caramanis. Tractable Transmission Topology Control Using Sensitivity Analysis.IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 27(3):1550–1559, August 2012

work page 2012
[24]

Solving Optimal Transmission Switching Problem via DC Power Flow Approximation

Juncheng Li, Trivikram Dokka, and Guglielmo Lulli. Solving Optimal Transmission Switching Problem via DC Power Flow Approximation. In2023 IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting (PESGM), pages 1–5, Orlando, FL, USA, July 2023. IEEE. 16 Transmission Topology Optimization using accelerated MapElitesA PREPRINT

work page 2023
[25]

Ming Niu, Can Wan, and Zhao Xu. A review on applications of heuristic optimization algorithms for optimal power flow in modern power systems.Journal of Modern Power Systems and Clean Energy, 2(4):289–297, December 2014

work page 2014
[26]

Enrico Marchesini, Benjamin Donnot, Constance Crozier, Ian Dytham, Christian Merz, Lars Schewe, Nico West- erbeck, Cathy Wu, Antoine Marot, and Priya L. Donti. RL2Grid: Benchmarking Reinforcement Learning in Power Grid Operations, June 2025

work page 2025
[27]

Optimizing Power Grid Topologies with Reinforcement Learning: A Survey of Methods and Challenges, May 2025

Erica van der Sar, Alessandro Zocca, and Sandjai Bhulai. Optimizing Power Grid Topologies with Reinforcement Learning: A Survey of Methods and Challenges, May 2025

work page 2025
[28]

Tindemans, Benjamin Donnot, and Antoine Marot

Medha Subramanian, Jan Viebahn, Simon H. Tindemans, Benjamin Donnot, and Antoine Marot. Exploring grid topology reconfiguration using a simple deep reinforcement learning approach. In2021 IEEE Madrid PowerTech, pages 1–6, Madrid, Spain, June 2021. IEEE

work page 2021
[29]

Thomas Lautenbacher, Ali Rajaei, Davide Barbieri, Jan Viebahn, and Jochen L. Cremer. Multi-Objective Rein- forcement Learning for Power Grid Topology Control. In2025 IEEE Kiel PowerTech, pages 1–7, Kiel, Germany, June 2025. IEEE

work page 2025
[30]

John H. Holland. Genetic Algorithms and Adaptation. In Oliver G. Selfridge, Edwina L. Rissland, and Michael A. Arbib, editors,Adaptive Control of Ill-Defined Systems, pages 317–333. Springer US, Boston, MA, 1984

work page 1984
[31]

Joel Lehman and Kenneth O. Stanley. Evolving a diversity of virtual creatures through novelty search and local competition. InProceedings of the 13th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, pages 211–218, Dublin Ireland, July 2011. ACM

work page 2011
[32]

K. Deb, A. Pratap, S. Agarwal, and T. Meyarivan. A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 6(2):182–197, April 2002

work page 2002
[33]

Kalyanmoy Deb and Himanshu Jain. An Evolutionary Many-Objective Optimization Algorithm Using Reference-Point-Based Nondominated Sorting Approach, Part I: Solving Problems With Box Constraints.IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 18(4):577–601, August 2014

work page 2014
[34]

Fast and stable MAP-Elites in noisy domains using deep grids

Manon Flageat and Antoine Cully. Fast and stable MAP-Elites in noisy domains using deep grids. InThe 2020 Conference on Artificial Life, pages 273–282, 2020

work page 2020
[35]

Accelerated Quality-Diversity through Massive Parallelism, October 2022

Bryan Lim, Maxime Allard, Luca Grillotti, and Antoine Cully. Accelerated Quality-Diversity through Massive Parallelism, October 2022

work page 2022
[36]

Evosax: JAX-based Evolution Strategies, December 2022

Robert Tjarko Lange. Evosax: JAX-based Evolution Strategies, December 2022

work page 2022
[37]

Patterns and correlations in european electricity prices.Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science, 34(7), 2024

Julius Trebbien, Anton Tausendfreund, Leonardo Rydin Gorj ˜ao, and Dirk Witthaut. Patterns and correlations in european electricity prices.Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science, 34(7), 2024

work page 2024
[38]

The relevance of grid expansion under zonal markets.The Energy Journal, 38(5):129–152, 2017

Joachim Bertsch, Tom Brown, Simeon Hagspiel, and Lisa Just. The relevance of grid expansion under zonal markets.The Energy Journal, 38(5):129–152, 2017

work page 2017
[39]

Market-Based Redispatch in Zonal Electricity Markets.SSRN Electronic Journal, 2018

Lion Hirth and Ingmar Schlecht. Market-Based Redispatch in Zonal Electricity Markets.SSRN Electronic Journal, 2018

work page 2018
[40]

Cgmes as an interface for multilateral grid modelling data exchange

Mateusz Gietz and Tomasz Rogowski. Cgmes as an interface for multilateral grid modelling data exchange. In 2019 Modern Electric Power Systems (MEPS), pages 1–5. IEEE, 2019

work page 2019
[41]

A note on finding the bridges of a graph.Information Processing Letters, 2(6):160–161, April 1974

R.Endre Tarjan. A note on finding the bridges of a graph.Information Processing Letters, 2(6):160–161, April 1974

work page 1974
[42]

Bus Split Distribution Factors.IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 39(3):5115–5125, May 2024

Joost Van Dijk, Jan Viebahn, Bastiaan Cijsouw, and Jasper Van Casteren. Bus Split Distribution Factors.IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 39(3):5115–5125, May 2024

work page 2024
[43]

Unified algebraic deviation of distribution factors in linear power flow, December 2024

Joost Van Dijk, Nico Westerbeck, Lars Schewe, Andrea Benigni, and Dirk Witthaut. Unified algebraic deviation of distribution factors in linear power flow, December 2024

work page 2024
[44]

Polars: Fast dataframe library for rust and python.https://github.com/pola-rs/ polars

Polars Developers. Polars: Fast dataframe library for rust and python.https://github.com/pola-rs/ polars. GitHub repository

work page
[45]

Babak Taheri and Daniel K. Molzahn. AC Power Flow Feasibility Restoration via a State Estimation-Based Post-Processing Algorithm, March 2024

work page 2024
[46]

GPU-Based N-1 Static Security Analysis Algorithm With Preconditioned Conjugate Gradient Method.IEEE Access, 8:124066–124075, 2020

Meng Fu, Gan Zhou, Jiahao Zhao, Yanjun Feng, Huan He, and Kai Liang. GPU-Based N-1 Static Security Analysis Algorithm With Preconditioned Conjugate Gradient Method.IEEE Access, 8:124066–124075, 2020. 17 Transmission Topology Optimization using accelerated MapElitesA PREPRINT

work page 2020
[47]

V oltage-sensitive distri- bution factors for contingency analysis and topology optimization, March 2026

Maurizio Titz, Dirk Witthaut, Joost van Dijk, Benjamin Petrick, and Nico Westerbeck. V oltage-sensitive distri- bution factors for contingency analysis and topology optimization, March 2026. 18

work page 2026