#123: fixing the rectangular formulation #153
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
simonbowly
requested changes
Aug 26, 2024
| @@ -153,6 +155,7 @@ def fix_shape(arr, ncols=None): | |||
| "gen": gen.to_dict("records"), | |||
| "branch": branch.to_dict("records"), | |||
| "gencost": gencost, | |||
| "casename": os.path.splitext(file_path)[0], | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would be better to use pathlib's stem here. This also needs a test which checks for the case name.
| @@ -905,7 +948,7 @@ def lpformulator_ac_create_constraints(alldata, model): | |||
| lpformulator_ac_add_polarconstraints(alldata, model) | |||
|
|
|||
| # nonconvex e, f representation | |||
| if alldata["use_ef"]: | |||
| if alldata["skipjabr"] is False and alldata["use_ef"]: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is False? if not alldata["skipjabr"] is the proper way to do a boolean test in python
| @@ -769,6 +766,52 @@ def lpformulator_ac_create_constraints(alldata, model): | |||
|
|
|||
| logger.info(f" {count} balance constraints added.") | |||
|
|
|||
| if alldata["skipjabr"] is True and alldata["use_ef"]: | |||
| @@ -369,7 +379,7 @@ def fill_result_fields(alldata, model, opftype, result): | |||
|
|
|||
| alldata["LP"]["cvar"] = cvar | |||
|
|
|||
| compute_voltage_angles(alldata, result) | |||
| # compute_voltage_angles(alldata, result) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is this just commented out?
| @@ -195,7 +214,7 @@ def convert_case_to_internal_format(case_dict): | |||
| branch["ratio"] = 1.0 | |||
|
|
|||
| alldata = {"LP": {}, "MIP": {}} | |||
|
|
|||
| alldata["casename"] = case_dict["casename"] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add a test that "casename" comes through in the result (assuming that's the intention?)
| # Remove isolated buses and their connected branches | ||
| remove_buses = {bus["bus_i"] for bus in case_dict["bus"] if bus["type"] == 4} | ||
| if remove_buses: | ||
| logger.info(f"Removing buses {remove_buses} (bustype=4)") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the result of this that the isolated buses do not appear in the solution at all? We should have a test to make sure they are put back in.
| @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ def solve_opf( | |||
| if opftype.lower() == "ac": | |||
| opftype = "ac" | |||
| useef = True | |||
| usejabr = True | |||
| usejabr = False | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changing the defaults. Are the tests updated to reflect this?
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
This PR fixes #123 and corrects the rectangular ACOPF formulation as follows:
Warning
The pstart initialization does not work with Gurobi 11, only with Gurobi 12. Therefore the performance on ACOPF will be bad until Gurobi 12. For instance, Gurobi 11.0.2 cannot find a feasible solution on network IEEE69.mat (from #123) after 600 seconds.