Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Fault location in offshore wind-farm networks dominated by inverter-based resources (IBRs) is complicated by converter-limited fault currents, cable charging currents and high fault resistance, which violate the assumptions of classical impedance-based estimators. This paper proposes PG-SDGL, a physics-grounded sequence-domain graph-learning framework that combines a graph-attention sequence-domain graph neural network (SeqGNN), a three-sequence physics-informed neural network (3Seq-PINN) for fault-resistance decoupling, sequence-residual split-conformal prediction intervals, cable charging-current compensation, an analytical IBR fault-current decomposition, a harmonic high-impedance-fault (HIF) gate with Dempster–Shafer fusion of two intelligent electronic devices and a protection-consistency index (PCI). The framework was evaluated in simulation on a 69 kV network with a 60 km overhead interconnection line and three 5–9 km submarine cable feeders, for four fault types and fault resistances of 2–150 Ω. Feeder-identification accuracy was 99.4–99.6%. Over 2–40 Ω, the average main-line mean relative error (MRE) was 0.195%, compared with 0.631% in the published random-forest benchmark on the same line model. The average fault-resistance mean absolute error decreased from 4.67 Ω (random-forest benchmark) to 2.07 Ω (single-sequence PINN) and 1.98 Ω (3Seq-PINN). The sequence-residual intervals reached 95.0–96.9% empirical coverage with a 33.8% smaller average normalized width than plain split-conformal intervals. At 150 Ω, HIF detection accuracy was 97.4%, location MRE was 1.48% and PCI was 0.924.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pandya et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: