Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “GO Competition”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

ARPA-E Grid Optimization (GO) Competition Challenge 1

The ARPA-E Grid Optimization (GO) Competition Challenge 1, from 2018 to 2019, focused on the basic Security Constrained AC Optimal Power Flow problem (SCOPF) for a single time period. The Challenge utilized sets of unique datasets generated by the ARPA-E GRID DATA program. Each dataset consisted of a collection of power system network models of different sizes with associated operating scenarios (snapshots in time defining instantaneous power demand, renewable generation, generator and line availability, etc.). The datasets were of two types: Real-Time, which included starting-point information, and Online, which did not. Week-Ahead data is also provided for some cases but was not used in the Competition. Although most datasets were synthetic and generated by GRIDDATA, a few came from industry and were only used in the Final Event. All synthetic Input Data and Team Results for the GO Competition Challenge 1 for the Sandbox, Trial Events 1 to 3, and the Final Event along with problem, format, scoring and rules descriptions are available here. Data for industry scenarios will not be made public. Challenge 1, a minimization problem, required two computational steps. Solver 1 or Code 1 solved the base SCOPF problem under a strict wall clock time limit, as would be the case in industry, and reported the base case operating point as output, which was used to compute the Objective Function value that was used as the scenario score. The feasibility of the solution was provided by the Solver 2 or Code 2, which solves the power flow problem for all contingencies based on the results from Solver 1. This is not normally done in industry, so the time limits were relaxed. In fact, there were no time limits for Trial Event 1. This proved to be a mistake, with some codes running for more than 90 hours, and a time limit of 2 seconds per contingency was imposed for all other events. Entrants were free to use their own Solver 2 or use an open-source version provided by the Competition. Containers, such as Docker, were considered to improve the portability of codes, but none that could reliably support a multi-node parallel computing environment, e.g., MPI, could be found. For more information on the competition and challenge see the "GO Competition Challenge 1 Information" and "GO Competition Challenge 1 Additional Information" resources below.

ACOPF↗
DOE OSTI2024

ARPA-E Grid Optimization (GO) Competition Challenge 3

Synthetic Input Data and Team Results for the GO Competition Challenge 3 for Events 1 - 4 and the Sandbox, along with problem and format descriptions and code to validate data and solutions, are available here. Data for industry scenarios will not be made public. The Grid Optimization (GO) Competition Challenge 3 focused on the security-constrained optimal power flow (SCOPF) problem. It is part of a continuing effort begun with Challenges 1 and 2, to successfully discover, develop, and test innovative and disruptive software solutions for critical energy challenges and to overcome existing barriers. The broader goal of the of the GO Competition is to accelerate the development of transformational and disruptive methods for solving problems related to the electric power grid and to provide a transparent, fair, and comprehensive evaluation of new solution methods. Challenge 3 used multiperiod dynamic markets, including advisory models for extreme weather events, day-ahead markets, and the real-time markets with an extended look-ahead. In Event 4, whose submission window was August 31-September 4, 2023, 14 teams solved for the objective values of 669 scenarios (39 scenarios required solutions both with and without line switching being allowed). The 591 synthetic scenarios from 9 network models (3.6 GB) are available here. Ten teams were funded to participate and 7 won prizes totaling $2,400,000. The largest prize ($550,000) went to Mississippi State University. An additional $600,000 was awarded in Event 3 (6/15-16/2023). No prizes were awarded in Events 1 (1/25-27/2023) or 2 (4/13-14/2023). For more information on the competition and challenge see the "GO Competition Challenge 3 Information" resource below.

ACOPF↗
DOE OSTI2024

ARPA-E Grid Optimization (GO) Competition Challenge 2

The ARPA-E Grid Optimization (GO) Competition Challenge 2, from 2020 to 2021, expanded upon the problem posed in Challenge 1 by adding adjustable transformer tap ratios, phase shifting transformers, switchable shunts, price-responsive demand, ramp rate constrained generators and loads, and fast-start unit commitment. Furthermore, Challenge 2 was a maximization problem while Challenge 1 was a minimization problem. Specifically, the economic surplus, defined as the benefit of serving load minus the cost of generation, is being maximized. It was expected that the objective value of a given solution should be positive, representing economic gain, but negative objectives from poor solutions were possible. The two code submission feature of Challenge 1 was maintained. Additionally, Divisions 3 and 4 within the competition permitted on/off switching of transmission lines (Divisions 1 and 2 did not). After the initial release of the Problem Formulation on 7/20/2020, ARPA-E Director Lane Genatowski announced Challenge 2 on 9/12/2020. The final May 31, 2021, version of the Problem Formulation was 97 pages long with 299 equations. The Challenge proceeded with 2 non-prize Events and 2 prize Events. Teams receiving Challenge 1 FOA awards and prize money were required to use the prize money to fund their Challenge 2 efforts (Georgia Institute of Technology, Global Optimal Technology, Inc., Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Lehigh University, Northwestern University, Artelys, Columbia, Pearl Street Technologies, Pennsylvania State University, and University of Colorado Boulder). For more information on the competition and challenge 2 see the "GO Competition Challenge 2 Information" resource below. Challenge 1 and Challenge 3 information can be found in the resources linked below.

ACOPF↗
DOE OSTI2021

Grid Optimization (GO) Competition Platform

A software for a multi-challenge power-flow grid optimization competition was developed. The platform brings together high performance computing clusters, webservers, databases, competition datasets, schedulers, evaluation codes, and a multitude of language compilers and optimization solvers to host the competition. The original video announcing the competition, from former Secretary Perry, at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZwX3P9vS8M

Veeramany, Arun↗
DOE OSTI2024

ARPA E GO Competition

A Nonlinear Programming SC-ACOPF Framework with Parallel Computing Capabilities

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

GO Competition Challenge 1 Benchmark Approach and Validation Support

At the outset ARPA-e’s grid optimization competition sought to test a hypothesis that modern nonlinear optimization methods had reached a level of performance and reliability necessary to optimize energy grids using nonlinear power flow equations. The results demonstrated by this project and the other participants in the grid optimization competition have demonstrated beyond any shadow of doubt that this hypothesis is true. This result suggest that the mathematical optimization technology now exists to produce a revolution in power grid optimization software, which would improve the efficiency of energy grid operations to the broad benefit of society.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Grid Optimization Competition Challenge 3 Problem Formulation

This report contains the problem formulation for the Grid Optimization (GO) Competition Challenge 3. The Grid Optimization Competition is run by a team of researchers from a number of organizations, including the sponsor Advanced Research Projects Agency - Energy (ARPA-E), lead organization Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), and technical contributors from Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Texas A&M University (TAMU), Georgia Institute of Technology (GT), University of Wisconsin (UW), and others. The GO Competition poses challenge problems in the field of power grid management, invites entrants to develop solvers for these problems, invokes the solvers on a set of problem instances using common hardware, ranks the solvers according to their performance, and awards prizes according to the rankings. The overall goal of the GO Competition is to spur innovative research on high impact and computationally challenging problems in power grid management from initial development through commercial deployment. Complete information about the GO Competition can be found online at [2]. The webpage covers previous Challenges, rules, timeline, registration information, data formats, scoring methods, computational platform information, information on supported solvers and languages, sponsor information, frequently asked questions, administrator contact information, publicly available problem instances, computer code for reading and evaluating problem and solution data, a sandbox for testing solvers, and a solver submission interface, results, and publications.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Supporting ARPA-E Power Grid Optimization (Final Report)

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Arizona State University (ASU), Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech), Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Texas A&M University (TAMU), The University of Texas at Austin (UT), and the University of Wisconsin-Madison (UW-M) supported the ARPA-E Grid Optimization (GO) Competition by providing a common problem formulation, data format, datasets, evaluation mechanism, scoring, rules, and results that resulted in the awarding of $\$9.24$ million dollars to teams from academia, industry, and national labs for solving three sets of increasingly difficult non-linear, security- constrained AC Optimal Powerflow (AC-OPF) optimization problems in order to increase the efficiency of the US Electric Grid. It is estimated that a 1% increase in efficiency can save $\$1$ billion. Current industry practices typically use a linear DC model (DC-OPF) in order solve the OPF problem within the time constraints of the operation schedule. The GO Competition challenges the best power engineers, mathematicians, and computer scientists to make possible operational decisions based on accurate physical models. To accomplish this, the GO Competition created a series of Challenges and funded teams to produce the best solver. Challenge 1 was to solve the security constrained Alternating Current Optimal Power Flow (ACOPF) problem. Challenge 2 extended that to by adding adjustable transformer tap ratios, phase shifting transformers, switchable shunts, price-responsive demand, ramp rate constrained generators and loads, and fast-start unit commitment (UC). Furthermore, Challenge 2 was a maximization problem while Challenge 1 was a minimization problem. While Challenge 3 was being developed, the entrants were invited to find better solutions to the Challenge 2 synthetic datasets with no restrictions on time, hardware, or algorithms. The Challenge 2 solutions turned out to be very good. Challenge 3 expanded the Challenge 2 problem further by using multiperiod dynamic markets, including advisory models for extreme weather events, day-ahead markets, and the real-time markets with an extended look-ahead. These problems included active bid-in demand and topology optimization. Together the Challenges used nearly 30 million CPU hours. Since each team was working on the same problem, using the same data, and running on the same hardware, fair comparisons could be drawn as to the best solver. The datasets were varied enough, however, that the best solver for one dataset was not necessarily the best at another, so cumulative scores were used. The process was managed by the PNNL maintained website https://GOCompetition.energy.gov, where Entrants could find information about the problem, the data, the rules, submit their solver for evaluation, and see the scores of all the competing teams on a Leaderboard. Interest was world-wide but only American teams were eligible for prizes. The Competition has produced 34 journal articles 115 papers and been cited over 500 times in the literature, including 12 dissertations (4 from foreign countries; Columbia (2), Germany, and Italy) and 3 from the DOE ExaScale project. Software developed by Pearl Street Technologies for Challenges 1 and 2 is now deployed by Southwest Power Pool (SPP) and Midcontinent Independent Service Operator (MISO). Other teams have received inquiries from venture capitalists. Google DeepMind has thanked the Competition for making the datasets developed for the Competition public. They are using it to train machine learning models. The larger datasets have billions of unknowns to be solved for, but only a small percent matter in the final solution. Knowing what unknowns are important can dramatically speedup the solution.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2022

Open-source Tools for Solving Grid Optimization Problems: ARPA-e Benchmark Algorithm Overview [Slides]

This document contains the official formulation that will be used for evaluation in Challenge 2 of the Grid Optimization (GO) Competition. Minor changes may occur within the formulation. Entrants will be notified when a new version is released. Changes are not expected to be of a significance that would cause a change in approach for the Entrants. This formulation builds upon the Challenge 1 formulation published in ARPA-E DE-FOA-0001952. Entrants will be judged based on the current official Challenge 2 formulation posted on the GO Competition website (this document, which is subject to change), not the formulation posted in DE-FOA-0001952. Entrants are permitted and encouraged to use any alternative problem formulation and modeling convention within their own software (such as convex relaxation, decoupled power flow formulations, current-voltage formulations, etc.) in an attempt to produce an exact or approximate solution to this particular mathematical program. However, the judging of all submitted approaches must conform to the official formulation presented here.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2022

High Performance Solution for Security Constrained Optimal Power Flow

Solving the Alternating Current Optimal Power Flow (ACOPF) problem is key to economically efficient and reliable power networks with a good solution potentially saving utilities tens of billions of dollars annually (according to FERC). The Grid Optimization (GO) Competition set up by ARPA-E saw several promising solutions in Challenge 1. While team GOT-TJU-OPF placed top 10 in Division 3 and 4, this was not a satisfactory performance, and the team has identified specific areas to improve and will be adding more members to round out the necessary skills and expertise needed to be more competitive. The team set out for redemption during GO Challenge 2 with an improved High-Performance Solution for Security Constrained Optimal Power Flow. The (renamed) BSI-GOT-OPF Team ended up finishing top 2 overall in the competition. The algorithms developed have potential impacts for the electric power markets that are enormous. Optimal Power Flow technology can be an enabling technology to achieve energy-efficient power grids while enhancing renewable energy penetration, among others.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2023

Grid Optimization Competition on Synthetic and Industrial Power Systems

This paper summarizes a grid optimization (GO) competition effort in the United States to find the best solution strategies for up to interconnect-scale power system networks with around 32,000 buses. The optimization problem is a mixedinteger, non-convex non-linear problem, (MINLP) and includes discrete variables such as unit commitment and line switching, control settings (transformer taps and phase shifters with impedance correction tables), and bus shunts. The case study includes six actual industry grids as well as 16 realistic synthetic grids created by three different dataset teams. The winners are selected and ranked based on scoring criteria, which consider the solution quality (such as objective functions) within time limits. Nine winner teams are selected from 26 competitor teams. The results achieved by different teams are described and the performance of different algorithms on synthetic grids and actual industry grids are compared and analyzed.

mixed-integer non-linear programming↗
DOE OSTI2021

Tuning successive linear programming to solve AC optimal power flow problem for large networks

Successive linear programming (SLP) is a practical approach for solving large-scale nonlinear optimization problems. Alternating current optimal power flow (ACOPF) is no exception, particularly the large size of real-world networks. However, in order to achieve tractability, it is essential to tune the SLP algorithm presented in the literature. This paper presents a modified SLP algorithm to solve the ACOPF problem, specified by the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Grid Optimization (GO) Competition Challenge 1, within strict time limits. The algorithm first finds a near-optimal solution for the relaxed problem (i.e., Stage 1). Then, it finds a feasible solution in the proximity of the near-optimal solution (i.e., Stage 2 and Stage 3). The numerical experiments on test cases ranging from 500-bus to 30,000-bus systems show that the algorithm is tractable. Here the results show that our proposed algorithm is tractable and can solve more than 80% of test cases faster than the well-known Interior Point Method while significantly reduce the number of iterations required to solve ACOPF. The number of iterations is considered an important factor in the examination of tractability which can drastically reduce the computational time required within each iteration.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2021

A Scalable Mixed-Integer Decomposition Method for Security-Constrained Optimal Power Flow with Complementarity Constraints

This project aimed to develop a scalable algorithm for security-constrained optimal power flow (SCOPF) under contingency scenarios. In particular, the SCOPF problem targeted in the GO Competition is challenging because of the nonconvexity, its nonsmoothness, and the problem size, which increases with the number of contingency events. Complementarity constraints imposed in post-contingency variables are particularly challenging because they lead to a violation of constraint qualifications at any feasible point.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2021

Scalable Techniques for Stochastic Power Flow Problems (Final Report)

The proposed research focuses on developing scalable algorithms for two-stage security-constrained OPF problems with AC power flow constraints, a class of problems complicated by (i) scale arising from a scenario representation; and (ii) the presence of nonlinearity, nonconvexity, and possibly second-stage discreteness or complementarity. Unfortunately, most existing solvers cannot contend with both challenges simultaneously; accordingly, the proposed research focuses on developing solution techniques that can both scale with the number of scenarios and contend with nonconvexity and second-stage complementarity. We consider three avenues for addressing such problems: (i) Variable sample-size SQP (VS-SQP) methods that combine sparse Quasi-Newton updates with a scalable variance-reduced stochastic gradient scheme for stochastic QP subproblems, allowing for contending with second-stage complementarity via regularization; (ii) Variable sample-size stochastic Interior-point (VS-sIP) schemes that propose a sampling-based regularized (to allow for contending with complementarity) interior-point schemes in which a Schur-complement technique is employed for decomposing the Newton direction computation step; (iii) Variable sample-size tractable ADMM (VS-tADMM) schemes combine variable sample-sizes with carefully designed techniques for resolving each of the nonconvex updates (by leveraging the QCQP structures). We intend to compare the three schemes using performance profiles in terms of solution quality, scalability, etc. and then select one scheme which will then be developed and further refined in Python for purposes of the GO competition.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2024

Average Incremental Cost Pricing for the AC Unit Commitment Problem [Rev. 1]

Unit Commitment (UC) problems that consider the Alternating Current (AC) model of the transmission network have long been considered intractable to solve at scale by the power system community. Recently, the Grid-Optimization (GO) Competition held by the Advanced Research Project Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) has facilitated the development of the first algorithms to solve large-scale ACUC problems. This new capability opens a path towards the explicit consideration of the AC transmission network model in UC problems used to clear day-ahead electricity markets. This calls for the analysis of electricity market structures that accommodate both the continuous non-linearity of the AC transmission network and the discrete non-linearity of the UC problem simultaneously. This paper serves as an initial effort to do so by proposing an Average Incremental Cost (AIC) pricing structure that is designed around the ACUC problem. In particular, an AIC one-pass pricing problem is proposed that represents a continuously constrained variant of the ACUC problem and allows for the computation of Locational Incremental Prices (LIPs) for both real and reactive power as the local optimal Lagrange multipliers of the power balance constraints. To avoid degeneracy, the pricing problem includes a small parameter ϵ > 0. Under certain assumptions market participants are shown to realize profit that converges to a non-negative value as ϵ approaches zero, practically ensuring profitability for small values of ϵ. We additionally provide many simple and important examples that provide intuition and insights into the proposed prices. Examples illustrate the basic concept of AIC pricing, the derived profitability results, the existence of multiple LIPs, the importance of including reactive power in the dispatch and pricing problems, the need for reactive power prices, and the improved incentives exhibited by LIPs as compared to traditional Locational Marginal Prices (LMPs). We additionally indicate many directions for future work including analysis of larger test cases.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Tuning transport in graphene oxide membrane with single-site copper ($\mathrm{II}$) cations

Controlling the ion transport through graphene oxide (GO) membrane is challenging, particularly in the aqueous environment due to its strong swelling tendency. Fine-tuning the interlayer spacing and chemistry is critical to create highly selective membranes. We investigate the effect of single-site divalent cations in tuning GO membrane properties. Competitive ionic permeation test indicates that Cu 2+ cations dominate the transport through the 2D channels of GO membrane over other cations (Mg 2+ /Ca 2+ /Co 2+ ). Without/With the single-site M 2+ modifications, pristine GO, Mg-GO, Ca-GO, and Cu-GO membranes show interlayer spacings of ~13.6, 15.6, 14.5, and 12.3 Å in wet state, respectively. The Cu-GO membrane shows a two-fold decrease of NaCl (1 M) permeation rate comparing to pristine GO, Mg-GO, and Ca-GO membranes. In reverse osmosis tests using 1000 ppm NaCl and Na 2 SO 4 as feeds, Cu-GO membrane shows rejection of ~78% and ~94%, respectively, which are 5%–10% higher than its counterpart membranes.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
NASA NTRS2010

2010 NASA Exploration Systems Mission Directorate: Lunabotics Mining Competition Systems Engineering Paper

A fast growing approach in determining the best design concept for a problem is to hold a competition in which the rules are based on requirements similar to the actual problem. By going public with such competitions, sponsoring entities receive some of the most innovative engineering solutions in a fraction of the time and cost it would have taken to develop such concepts internally. Space exploration is a large benefactor of such design competitions as seen by the results of X-Prize Foundation and NASA lunar excavation competitions [1]. The results of NASA's past lunar excavator challenges has led to the need for an effective means of collecting lunar regolith in the absence of human beings. The 2010 Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) Lunar Excavation Challenge was created "to engage and retain students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, or STEM, in a competitive environment that may result in innovative ideas and solutions, which could be applied to actual lunar excavation for NASA." [2]. The ESMD Challenge calls for "teams to use telerobotics or autonomous operations to excavate at least 10kg of lunar regolith simulant in a 15 minute time limit" [2]. The Systems Engineering approach was used in accordance with Auburn University's mechanical engineering senior design course (MECH 4240-50) to develop a telerobotic lunar excavator, seen in Fig. 1, that fulfilled requirements imposed by the NASA ESMD Competition Rules. The goal of the senior design project was to have a validated lunar excavator that would be used in the NASA ESMD lunar excavation challenge.

Source record↗