Unified model improves topology identification and risk evaluation in power distribution networks, indicating enhanced operational resilience.
This paper proposes a unified data-driven framework for topology identification, risk quantification, and reconfiguration optimization in power distribution networks under incomplete and fragmented observability. Motivated by real-world challenges where asset metadata, SCADA records, GIS layouts, and dispatcher logs are misaligned or incomplete, the proposed approach reconstructs network topology using a graph convolutional network (GCN) that fuses heterogeneous data attributes and learns structural representations from partial connectivity information. On the inferred topology, a scenario-based risk evaluation model is formulated to capture both local fragility and spatial risk propagation, integrating factors such as load stress, asset aging, and nodal redundancy into a unified zone-level risk index. To mitigate this risk, a bilevel reconfiguration optimization model is developed, in which the upper level minimizes cumulative risk and switching cost while maximizing load restoration, and the lower level enforces electrical feasibility under contingency-aware constraints. The full pipeline is tested on a 58-node synthetic distribution system with embedded DERs, showcasing the ability of the framework to reduce peak nodal risk by 52.7%, restore over 94% of total demand in 90% of scenarios, and maintain tractable computation times under 9 mins per scenario across 100 fault cases. A suite of detailed visualizations–including confidence-based topology maps, switching heatmaps, congestion-weighted flow diagrams, and fairness-control tradeoff surfaces–demonstrates the interpretability and operational relevance of the results. The proposed framework offers a scalable, adaptive solution for resilient distribution network management under uncertainty and fragmented digital infrastructure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sun et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: