Research article Special Issues

Ring connected microgrid clusters for improved resiliency in distribution systems with high solar PV penetration

  • A ring-connected microgrid cluster can be formed by connecting geographically closed microgrids for mutual power sharing to increase the system's reliability. Real-time power balance within individual microgrids and power sharing among the microgrids of an islanded microgrid cluster would be challenging during contingencies if they are not properly sized and controlled. We propose a technique to design a ring-connected microgrid cluster that has several distributed energy resources. The amount of power flow via interconnecting cables was decided considering the size of the energy storage of the neighboring microgrids. A control system was designed to minimize the effect of severe transients in the neighboring microgrids in the network. The performance of the proposed technique was verified using a ring-connected microgrid cluster with four microgrids derived based on a real distribution system. The results illustrated that the proposed ring-connected microgrid cluster could maintain the power balance of the networked microgrid during the contingencies of neighboring microgrids, increasing the resiliency of the system compared to the radial and islanded operations.

    Citation: W. E. P. Sampath Ediriweera, N. W. A. Lidula, R. Samarasinghe. Ring connected microgrid clusters for improved resiliency in distribution systems with high solar PV penetration[J]. AIMS Energy, 2024, 12(4): 872-904. doi: 10.3934/energy.2024041

    Related Papers:

    [1] Makoto Nakakita, Teruo Nakatsuma . Analysis of the trading interval duration for the Bitcoin market using high-frequency transaction data. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2025, 9(1): 202-241. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2025007
    [2] Keyue Yan, Ying Li . Machine learning-based analysis of volatility quantitative investment strategies for American financial stocks. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2024, 8(2): 364-386. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2024014
    [3] Timotheos Paraskevopoulos, Peter N Posch . A hybrid forecasting algorithm based on SVR and wavelet decomposition. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2018, 2(3): 525-553. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2018.3.525
    [4] Fredrik Hobbelhagen, Ioannis Diamantis . A comparative study of symbolic aggregate approximation and topological data analysis. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2024, 8(4): 705-732. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2024027
    [5] Akash Deep . Advanced financial market forecasting: integrating Monte Carlo simulations with ensemble Machine Learning models. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2024, 8(2): 286-314. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2024011
    [6] Anouar Ben Mabrouk, Sabrine Arfaoui, Mohamed Essaied Hamrita . Wavelet-based systematic risk estimation for GCC stock markets and impact of the embargo on the Qatar case. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2023, 7(2): 287-336. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2023015
    [7] David G. McMillan . The information content of the stock and bond return correlation. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2018, 2(3): 757-775. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2018.3.757
    [8] Nan Zhang, Li Zhu . Structural changes in China's flow of funds (1992–2022): A Who-to-Whom model. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2025, 9(1): 167-201. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2025006
    [9] Ngo Thai Hung . Equity market integration of China and Southeast Asian countries: further evidence from MGARCH-ADCC and wavelet coherence analysis. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2019, 3(2): 201-220. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2019.2.201
    [10] Fangzhou Huang, Jiao Song, Nick J. Taylor . The impact of business conditions and commodity market on US stock returns: An asset pricing modelling experiment. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2022, 6(3): 433-458. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2022019
  • A ring-connected microgrid cluster can be formed by connecting geographically closed microgrids for mutual power sharing to increase the system's reliability. Real-time power balance within individual microgrids and power sharing among the microgrids of an islanded microgrid cluster would be challenging during contingencies if they are not properly sized and controlled. We propose a technique to design a ring-connected microgrid cluster that has several distributed energy resources. The amount of power flow via interconnecting cables was decided considering the size of the energy storage of the neighboring microgrids. A control system was designed to minimize the effect of severe transients in the neighboring microgrids in the network. The performance of the proposed technique was verified using a ring-connected microgrid cluster with four microgrids derived based on a real distribution system. The results illustrated that the proposed ring-connected microgrid cluster could maintain the power balance of the networked microgrid during the contingencies of neighboring microgrids, increasing the resiliency of the system compared to the radial and islanded operations.



    1. Introduction

    Financial market infrastructures (FMIs) play a crucial in the well-functioning of the economy. They facilitate the clearing, settlement, and recording of monetary and other financial transactions. Disruptions to or outages of these systems can seriously damage the economy, as this means financial actors cannot fulfil their obligations in time. Therefore, these infrastructures have to meet high standards defined by Principles for Financial Market Infrastructures (PFMIs, CPSS, 2012). FMI transaction data can provide relevant information on the well-being of these FMIs and the financial actors in these FMIs. This information can be useful 1) to overseers and operators who have an interest in the well-functioning of the FMI itself, to 2) prudential supervisors who are interested in the well-being of a single financial institution (e.g. commercial bank or insurance company), 3) to financial stability experts who have an interest in the well-being of the financial system as a whole and 4) monetary policy experts who are interested in the well-functioning of the money markets.

    Good examples of how FMI transaction data has been used are (Berndsen and Heijmans, 2017). They explained how TARGET2 transactions can be converted into risk indicators, where a risk indicator is defined as a pair of variables (Observation, Benchmark), where Observation is the particular value of the risk indicator at some point in time examined, whereas the Benchmark value indicates normal value of the indicator.* If the Observation deviates far enough from the Benchmark we have a signal. explained how TARGET2 transactions can be converted into risk indicators, where a risk indicator is defined as a pair of variables (Observation, Benchmark), where Observation is the particular value of the risk indicator at some point in time examined, whereas the Benchmark value indicates normal value of the indicator. If the Observation deviates far enough from the Benchmark we have a signal. Furthermore, the risk indicators must follow two general requirements, as they should be: 1) easy to explain to an end-user, and 2) relevant and scientifically correct. The reason why they have to be easy to explain is that end-users, e.g. managers, regulators or policy advisors, are the intended recipients of this type of information. Otherwise, those indicators are likely to stay unused. Arciero et al. (2016) who identify unsecured interbank money market loans from TARGET2 and Baek et al. (2014) who define network indicators for monitoring intraday liquidity in the Korean large value payment system (BoK-wire).

    *TARGET2 is the most important euro-denominated large-value payment system.

    Indicators or time series based on transaction level data often contain cyclical patterns, which have to be corrected for. This paper studies the performance of different models to extract cyclical patterns from time series based on transaction data. By extracting patterns from the times series, we distinguish between normal patterns over time and potential stressful or notable patterns. We investigate two different ARIMA models with dummies and a state space model, which is a more advanced method. The dummy variables we include in the ARIMA models relate to the day of the week, months and decision by the Governing Council (with respect to the reserve maintenance period). The state space models are introduced by De Livera et al. (2011) and Hyndman and Athanasopoulos (2013). They study forecasting time series with complex seasonal patterns using exponential smoothing. The time series we investigate in this paper are based on daily figures of network indicators, operational indicators and indicators providing information on liquidity flows between TARGET2 and other FMIs. We first fit three different models to the first part of the data (train data). Then we produce forecasts for the last part of the data (test data). By comparing the forecasts we determine which model performs best. Our paper is closely related to earlier work of Van Ark and Heijmans (2016). They compare the performance of a state space model to a Fourier ARIMA model and ARIMA dummy models for data that is aggregated per 10 minutes and per hour. They find that the state space model outperforms the ARIMA models. Our paper adds to the literature by setting up a model to correct for cyclicality in indicators based on FMI transaction level data. Triepels et al. (2017) provides a completely different method of looking at patterns or features in the data by using a machine learning technique.

    These time series are the basis of the risk indicator development by Berndsen and Heijmans (2017).

    Massarenti et al. (2012) study the timing of TARGET2 payments. They find that most value is transferred in the last business hour of the day. This implies that a disruption at this time can have serious consequences: 1) as the value is large, a disruption can seriously harm liquidity flows, 2) as it is the last hour of the business day, there is little time to solve the disruption and fulfill payment obligations. Baek et al. (2014) describe the network properties of the Korean interbank payment system BOK-Wire+. They apply existing methodologies for identifying systemically important banks and develop a new intraday liquidity indicator that compares banks' expected resources for settling payments in the remainder of the day with their expected liquidity requirements. Squartini et al. (2013) show early-warning signals for topological collapse in interbank networks. They study quarterly interbank exposures among Dutch banks between 1998 and 2008. The outcome of their research is relevant for bank regulators. One of their findings is a well-defined core-periphery structure. In contrast to our paper they use highly aggregated data instead of granular data.

    The outline of this research is as follows. Section 2 provides a description of the studied data. Section 3 explains the models which have been tested for their forecast performance. The results of model performance are presented in section 4. Section 5 concludes.


    2. Data

    This section describes the transaction data and the time series that are used for this research. Section 2.1 provides general information on the most important euro denominated large value payment system (TARGET2). Section 2.2 describes the types of transactions that are settled in TARGET2. The time series that are used in this research are described in section 2.3.


    2.1. TARGET2

    TARGET2 is the real-time gross settlement (RTGS) system for euro-denominated payments, which is owned and operated by the Eurosystem. It is one of the largest RTGS systems in the world. Payment transactions in TARGET2 are settled individually (gross) on a continuous real-time basis, in central bank money with immediate finality. TARGET2 settles approximately 350,000 transactions with a corresponding value of EUR 2,000 billion. In 2014 TARGET2 had approximately 1000 direct participants and ± 800 indirect participants.§ Most of the participants are commercial banks located in the euro area. Besides commercial banks, central banks of the European Union and Ancillary Systems (AS) also participate in TARGET2. Ancillary Systems are systems that process clearing and settlement of payments. Non-EU banks acting through a subsidiary in the EU can also obtain direct access to TARGET2.

    TARGET2 stands for Trans-European Automated Real-Time Gross settlement Express Transfer system.

    §https://www.ecb.europa.eu/paym/t2/html/index.en.html

    For a complete overview of TARGET2 access criteria, see the TARGET2 guideline https://www.ecb.europa.eu/ecb/legal/1003/1349/html/index.en.html


    2.2. Transaction data

    The data consist of settled transactions in the range of June 2008 to December 2015. TARGET2 transactions can be divided into four main categories, see Table 2 in Appendix B. Category 1 are the transactions between commercial banks. Category 2 consists of transactions in which national central banks (NCB) are involved on the receiving and/or submitting side (or both) of the transaction. The third category consists of transactions that are submitted to TARGET2 by Ancillary Systems (ASs). Category 4 transactions are transactions that are related to liquidity transfers. Transactions of sub-category 4.4 (so called technical transfer) are excluded in our research as these are transfers of liquidity between accounts of the same legal entity.


    2.3. Time series

    We investigate the performance of our models on different types of time series derived from TARGET2 transaction data. Table 1 provides an overview of investigated time series. Each time series defines a different measure of a characteristic of the networks of payments on a certain day. The time series are divided into 4 groups: A) operational, B) network properties, C) links to other ancillary systems and D) HHIs. A common factor is that they are all daily aggregates. An example of one of the time series is shown in Figure 1.

    Table 1. Time series based on TARGET2 transaction data.
    Time series numbe Description
    A Operational indicators
    1 Relative performance TARGET2
    2 Throughput at 12.00
    3 Throughput at 14.30
    B Network properties
    4 Edge density undirected
    5 Edege density directed
    6 Degree
    7 Reciprocity
    8 Transitity
    9 Eigenvector centrality
    10 Hub centrality
    11 Authority centrality
    C Links to AS
    12 Turnover to AS (absolute)
    13 Turnover to AS (relative)
    D HHI
    14 HHI turnover
    15 HHI degree
    16 HHI Eigenvector centr
    17 HHI Hub centr.
    18 HHI Authority centr.
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 1. Example of one of the used time series: Throughput at 12.00 which indicates the percentage of the total volume of transactions that is settled at noon for each day.

    2.3.1. A: operational

    The time series with respect to operational aspects are relatively straightforward. We look at 1) the relative usage of the system and 2) on the throughput of liquidity at certain times of the business day. The relative usage is measured by dividing the actual number of transactions settled on a given day by the amount guaranteed by the service level agreement of the payment system. This guaranteed amount has been laid down in the service level agreement.

    The throughput guidelines look at the cumulative value settled over the day. These guidelines are intraday deadlines by which individual banks are required to send a predefined proportion of the value of their daily payments. CHAPS, the UK large value payment system, enforces these guidelines, see Ball et al. (2011).

    The throughput guidelines set up by CHAPS for each participants are as follows:

    Transferred value before 14.30<=75% (1)
    Transferred value before 12.00<=50% (2)

    It is of course possible to set different percentages and cut off times.


    2.4. B: network properties

    The literature describes the use of many network properties for payment systems, see e.g. Pröpper et al. (2013) or Soramäki et al. (2007). Edge density (which is also known as connectivity) is the ratio of number of actual links and total number of possible links between nodes, see Appendix A.1. Degree is the number of links of each node per day, see Appendix A.2. Reciprocity is the fraction of links with a link in the opposite direction, see Appendix A.3. Transitivity (also known as clustering coefficient) measures the probability that neighbors of a node are also connected to each other, see Appendix A.4.

    Eigenvector centrality captures the importance of connected nodes and elaborates the concept of degree, see Appendix A.5 for a definition. The eigenvector centrality not only captures the amount of links for each node (like degree), but also captures how important each connected node is. This means that a node can have links to many other nodes (high degree), but in order to also have a high eigenvector centrality, the connected nodes must also have many connections to other nodes. Hub and authority centrality show whether the in- and outgoing links of nodes are going to or coming from important nodes. Hub nodes are nodes that point to many useful (high authority) nodes and nodes with high authority scores are nodes pointed to by nodes with high hub scores.

    The literature often also looks at the diameter of the network. This number is very stable (between 5 and 7) over time. Therefore, we do not investigate this indicator further.


    2.4.1. C: links to ancillary systems

    TARGET2 settles many transactions going from and to other FMIs (also called ancillary systems in the context of TARGET2). Therefore, there is a liquidity dependency between TARGET2 and these Ancillary systems (ASs). Time series number 12 describes the development of the absolute turnover of ancillary systems in TARGET2. Series 13 gives the relative development of the ancillary system turnover relative to the total turnover of TARGET2.


    2.4.2. D: HHI

    The normalized Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) denotes the distribution of relative turnover of participants. If there is one large bank with all turnover of the whole market then the normalized HHI is 1. When turnover is equally distributed amongst participants, this number is zero. The normalized HHI is calculated by using the following formula:

    HHInormalized=Ni=1M2i1/N11/N (3)

    for N>1, where Mi is the market share of bank N.

    We apply the HHI not only to the outgoing turnover of banks but also to the network properties degree, eigenvector centrality, hub centrality and authority centrality. The HHI is a measure that in contrast to the median takes the distribution of each node (bank) into account. However, the largest node has the largest contribution to the HHI.


    3. Method

    We compare three different models that can capture cyclical variation. The first two models are based on the simple ARIMA model:

    Yt=pi=1φiYti+qi=1θiεti+εt (4)

    The optimal number of included lags of the Auto Regressive parts p and Moving Average parts q are found based on the minimization of the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC). To detect seasonality, the simple ARIMA model is often extended by Fourier's series, as explained in Hyndman and Athanasopoulos (2013). The main idea of this method is to write a periodic function as a combination of sines and cosines. However, this method requires equal cycle lengths. Since the number of business days differs across months, this model is not suitable for detecting monthly seasonality. This paper considers the following models to detect cyclicality:

    1. ARIMA with dummy variables for days of the week and first, middle and last three days of the month (Dummy model 1).

    2. ARIMA with the dummy variables as used in the first dummy model extended by governing council meetings decisions (Dummy model 2).

    3. TBATS: Trigonometric, Box-Cox transformation, ARMA errors, Trend and Seasonality.


    3.1. Dummy model 1: DM1

    Dummy Model 1 extends the standard ARIMA model by adding dummy variables for the day of the week and month:

    Yt=μ+Mi=1Pi1j=1γi,jDi,j,t+pi=1φiYti+qi=1θiεti+εt (5)

    where Di,j,t is a matrix containing the dummy variables for the day of the week and month. This means that for each business day of the week and month a dummy variable is created. As it was found that the Tuesdays usually did not show any significant changes in payment behavior, this day is the omitted variable to avoid the dummy variable trap. Figure 2 shows how the monthly dummy variables are constructed for months with 20 business days.

    Figure 2. Dummy variable construction for a month with 20 business days.

    For example one column in the Di,j,t matrix is the Monday dummy variable, which is equal to one for each Monday and zero otherwise. Another column in Di,j,t is for example the 'Last day of the month' variable, which is equal to 1 for each last day of the month, and zero otherwise. The length of these columns is equal to the total number of business days in the full dataset.

    Irrespective of the length of the month we always use the first five, last five, and middle five business days. The first five dummy variables correspond to the first five business days of the month, and are referred to as 'Start1, ..., Start5' in Figure 2. The last and middle five days are referred to as 'End1, ..., End5' and 'Middle1, ..., Middle5' respectively. If the middle number is not an integer, it is rounded up to the nearest integer number. We look at the first, middle and last days of the month to investigate where seasonality is the strongest.

    We find that for the dummy model, the optimum number of first, middle and last days of the month to include is three, which means that we include nine dummy variables for day of the month. Furthermore, this model includes dummy variables for the business days of the week (except Tuesday). Hence in total 13 dummy variables are used. This model will be referred to as DM1.** Since parsimonious models are preferred, we determine whether the week and/or month dummy variables could be omitted without significantly lowering the performance of Dummy model 1 by applying the Likelihood Ratio (LR) test:

    LR=2[L(˜θ)L(ˆθ)] (6)

    **We also applied a model that includes all week and all monthly dummy variables. However, even though many variables are added to the model, it did not improve the fit or forecast. Therefore, the model that includes all monthly dummy variables is not discussed further in this paper.

    where L(˜θ) is the log-likelihood of the restricted model (fewer variables) and L(ˆθ) the log-likelihood of the more unrestricted model (more variables). Under the null hypothesis, the Likelihood Ratio statistic follows approximately a χ2n distribution (see Wilks, 1938) where degrees of freedom n is equal to the difference of the estimated parameters between the two nested models. H0 is rejected in case LRχ2n;1α which means that the unrestricted (full) model fits the data significantly better than the model with fewer variables, corrected for the fact that adding more variables should always lead to a better fit. In case the LR test concludes that the month or week dummy variables do not significantly improve the model, these variables are excluded from Di,j,t. ††

    ††This changes the number of columns in Di,j,t from 13 to 4 or 9 respectively


    3.2. Dummy model 2: DM2

    The decisions by the Eurosystem's Governing Council may affect behavior of market participants. The second model extends Dummy model 1 by including the Governing Council meetings, which have an impact on the Reserve Maintenance Period (RMP). Besides the week and month dummies as used in DM1, we also include the first and last three business days of the Reserve Maintenance Periods. Therefore, DM2 includes six more dummy variables than DM1. This version of the ARIMA-dummy model will be referred to as (DM2, or Dummy model 2). Both DM1 and DM2 are estimated by Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE).


    3.3. TBATS

    The last model is a state space model with a level component lt and is extended with M trigonometric seasonal cycles sit and ARIMA errors dt. The TBATS model is introduced by De Livera et al. (2011) as an extension of conventional Innovation State Space Models in order to include less restricted cyclical patterns and to deal with correlated errors. The TBATS model uses a transformation of the data Y(ω)t, which is the Box-Cox transformed data Yt, in order to allow for some types of nonlinearity. As extensively discussed in De Livera et al. (2011) the TBATS model is defined by:

    Y(ω)t=t1+ϕbt1+Ti=1s(i)t1+dt (7a)
    t=t1+ϕbt1+αdt (7b)
    bt=(1ϕ)b+ϕbt1+βdt (7c)
    s(i)t=kij=1s(i)j,t (7d)
    s(i)j,t=s(i)j,t1cos(2πjtmi)+s(i)j,t1sin(2πjtmi)+γ(i)1dt (7e)
    s(i)j,t=s(i)j,t1sin(2πjtmi)+s(i)j,t1cos(2πjtmi)+γ(i)2dt (7f)

    From line 7a it can be seen that the data is decomposed into level, trend and seasonal components. The ith seasonal component has (possible non-integer) length mi and is written as a sum of k harmonics. The stochastic level of the ith seasonal component is denoted by s(i)j,t, and the stochastic growth in the level of the ith seasonal component allows the seasonal periods to slightly change over time, and is denoted by s(i)j,t.

    De Livera et al. (2011) state that estimation of the TBATS model is done by minimizing equation (8) with respect to θ which is a vector that contains the Box-Cox parameter ω, the smoothing parameters and ARMA coefficients:

    L=n log(SSE)2(ω1)nt=1logYt (8)

    where L is the optimal log-likelihood and SSE is the sum of squared errors that is optimized for given parameter values.

    The advantage of the ARIMA dummy model is that the model itself is quite intuitive and if the dummy variables are constructed in the proposed way it does not matter whether lengths of periods are varying. Contrary to the periods in the TBATS model, the end of the month can be always taken into account in the ARIMA dummy model, irrespective of the length of the month. The TBATS model on the other hand has an outcome that is very intuitive since this model decomposes the time series into different components such as level, trend and seasons, which easily results in a visual output.


    3.4. Model comparison


    3.4.1. Out-of-sample fit

    We assume that the model with the best out-of-sample fit is also the model that captures cyclical variation best. In order to avoid over-fitting of the data, model performance of the TBATS and ARIMA dummy models is compared based on out-of-sample fit. The model estimation is based on July 2008–June 2014 and the fit of each model is based on July 2014–Dec 2015, which are the train data and the test data respectively. The output of the estimation that is based on the train data is used to determine forecasts for the test period. Two different forecasts are produced; 5 and 20 period(s) ahead, which means that for each forecast it is assumed that all data up until 5 or 20 days ago is known. Reason for this is that 5 periods correspond to a week and 20 periods correspond approximately to a month.


    3.4.2. RMSE

    For each forecast (5 and 20 periods ahead for each risk indicator) the out-of-sample Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) is calculated, which indicates the magnitude of the difference between the predicted observations and the real observations. Contrary to most accuracy measures, the RMSE penalizes the error for forecasted observations that deviate considerably from the actual data while penalizing overestimations and underestimations equally. However, since the RMSE is not scale invariant it cannot be used to compare the fit across different indicators. An accuracy measure that can be used across risk indicators is the Mean Average Percentage Error (MAPE). However, since the MAPE penalizes overestimations more than underestimations, the RMSE is a more appropriate measure to determine the fit of each forecast.


    4. Results


    4.1. Cyclical patterns

    For each risk indicator we determine whether cyclical patterns (month and/or week) are present. We assume that cyclical patterns are detected more accurately if the fitted values of the forecast are closer to the actual values, which is measured by RMSE. We conclude that for the 1.1 and 1.2 transactions combined all risk indicators contain significant week and month patterns, except for the turnover to AS (time series 12 and 13 in Table 1) for which the TBATS model cannot recognize a month or week pattern.†† However, when all transactions (except 4.4) are included, the ARIMA dummy models still determines significant cyclical patterns, but the TBATS model does not recognize any cyclical pattern for the relative turnover to AS, the HHI eigenvector and hub centrality. Table 3 in Appendix C provides an overview of cyclical variations for the dummy model and the TBATS model.

    ††We also modeled 1.1 and 1.2 transactions separately, however, we did not find significant differences compared to the patterns that are found when both 1.1 and 1.2 transactions are included.


    4.2. Forecast accuracy

    The out-of-sample fit is compared based on the RMSEs of the 5 and 20 periods ahead forecasts. Since the absolute value of the RMSE depends on the scale of the risk indicator, it is hard to interpret the magnitude. In order to provide some referential framework to the RMSE of the Dummy and TBATS models, they are compared to the RMSEs of naive models. The 5 periods ahead forecasts are compared to the naive model where each value at time t is set equal to the value at time t5. The 20 periods ahead forecasts are compared to the naive model where each value at time t is set equal to the value at time t20. For each risk indicator we normalized the RMSE with respect to the naive model and subtracted 1. Therefore, a positive value means that the forecast of a certain model performs better than the naive forecasts, and a negative value implies that the forecast of a certain model performs worse than the naive forecasts. Since the RMSEs are normalized, the magnitudes can be interpreted as a percentage increase or decrease with respect to the naive model. For example a value of 0.3 implies that the RMSE of a model is 30 % lower (better) than the RMSE of the naive model.

    Figure 3 and 4 show the normalized RMSE for 5 and 20 days ahead forecasting for the 1.1 and 1.2 transactions. For nearly all indicators, the ARIMA dummy and TBATS model perform better than the naive model as virtually all bars are positive. Also, ARIMA dummy models produce more accurate forecasts than the TBATS model.

    Figure 3. Out-of-sample fit of all indicators for 1.1 and 1.2 transactions with respect to the naive model. A negative value indicates that a certain forecast/fit is worse than the naive model.
    Figure 4. Out-of-sample fit of all indicators for 1.1 and 1.2 transactions with respect to the naive model.A negative value indicates that a certain forecast/fit is worse than the naive model.

    We expect that this difference between the ARIMA dummy models and the TBATS model is due to the varying month lengths. Even though the TBATS model can capture cycles that change slightly, we expect that the month lengths vary too much across months. From Figure 3 and 4 we can also conclude that the difference in performance between DM1 and DM2 is very small. This implies that adding the governing council decisions does not significantly improve the model, and therefore we conclude that the RMP effect is not significant. Figure 7 and 8 in Appendix D show the normalized RMSE for 5 and 20 days ahead forecasting for all transactions.


    4.3. Visualized forecasts

    Figure 6 visualizes the 20 days (roughly 1 calendar month) ahead forecasting of the reciprocity indicator. The figure shows the difference between the predicted values (dashed red line) and the actual observations (solid blue line) for the degree indicator, using dummy model 1. The light, medium and dark gray area correspond to the 90, 95 and 99% confidence intervals, respectively. The errors can be approximated by a normal distribution. Figure 5 shows an example of the error distribution compared to the normal distribution.

    Figure 5. Histogram of errors of Throughput at 12.00 indicator of 1.1 and 1.2 transactions, produced by Dummy model 1.
    Figure 6. 20 days ahead forecast example: Reciprocity predicted 20 periods ahead by Dummy model 1.

    The errors, however, have fatter tails than a normal distribution. As a result the number of times the predicted value lies outside e.g. the 99% interval is more than 1%.

    To signal the existence of a problem, the so called 'traffic light' approach (green, yellow, red) is adopted in Berndsen and Heijmans (2017). In case of green light, there is no problem with a certain indicator relative to the Benchmark. A yellow light shows a moderate change and a red light shows a substantial change in the indicator relative to the Benchmark. This is a very intuitive way to signal the potential risks linked to the time evolution of a particular indicator.

    FMI experts monitoring indicators often use a signaling for automatically identifying changes that should be considered abnormal. For signaling there is a tradeoff between giving alarms too often (false positive) or too few (false negative). Depending on the preference of the expert, the confidence intervals outside of which alarms should be given can be chosen to be wider or narrower. Also, experts can adjust the number of times they are warned by changing the threshold for the number of times the real value lies outside the prediction interval in a given month.


    5. Conclusions

    This paper examined cyclical patterns in FMI risk indicators using TARGET2 transaction data ranging from 2008 up to 2015. We investigate three different cyclical patterns as input to the models; 1) week, 2) month and 3) reserve maintenance period. All three models are able to detect multiple cyclical patterns. The ARIMA dummy models are flexible in varying period lengths. The ARIMA models can generally handle cycle length better than the TBATS model, which is an important feature for the month pattern since the number of business days in a month varies between 19 and 23. On the other hand, the output of the TBATS model is more intuitive. This output visualizes the amplitude of each cycle (i.e. week and month) individually and combined.

    Significant cyclical patterns are found by both the ARIMA models and the TBATS models for nearly all risk indicators based on interbank (1.1 and 1.2) transactions. When all transactions (excluding technical transfers, category 4.4) are included in the risk indicators, the TBATS model does not find significant cyclical patterns in some (3 out of 18) risk indicators. We find that the forecasts from the ARIMA dummy models are more accurate than the TBATS forecasts. Moreover, there is not much difference between the RMSEs of the two ARIMA dummy models. Hence, we do not include the governing council decision in our model. FMI or central bank experts, such as policy advisors, FMI overseers and financial stability experts, could use our forecasting method to determine whether a risk indicator deviates significantly from the normal pattern.

    Our method can be used by financial market infrastructure operators or overseers in their monitoring and assessment of the system. The indicators developed by [4] and also other (future) indicators that are based on their own history, benefit from our threshold method to set a mathematically justified level for medium or high risk. The finetuning of the threshold, however, needs to be done with the expert in charge and may depend on the different application. The indicators and threshold method have been used in the Eurosystem to develop a monitoring dashboard for the system overseers. In fact, the development and finetuning of this dashboard has been done in very close cooperation with the overseers.


    Acknowledgments

    The authors would like to thank Ron Berndsen and the anonymous referees of Quantiative Finance and Economics for providing useful feedback on earlier drafts of this paper. They also would like to thank the participants of the 4th joint Payments Canada and Bank of Canada-Bank symposium for their feedback.


    Conflict of interest

    Heijmans is a member of one of the user groups with access to TARGET2 data in accordance with Article 1 (2) of Decision ECB/2010/9 of 29 July 2010 on access to and use of certain TARGET2 data. DNB and the PSSC have checked the paper against the rules for guaranteeing the confidentiality of transaction-level data imposed by the PSSC pursuant to Article 1 (4) of the above-mentioned issue. The views expressed in the paper are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Eurosystem or De Nederlandsche Bank.


    Appendix


    A. Time series explanation


    A.1. Edge density

    The edge density is calculated in the following way:

    c=Ni=1Nj=1aijN(N1) (9)

    where aij is the adjacency matrix that contains a 1 if two nodes have a link on a day and zero otherwise. Edge density is also known as connectivity and measures the connectivity of the network by determining the ratio of number of actual links and the total number of possible links between nodes. The edge density of the 50th quantile is around 0.05 which means that an average participant is connected to only 5 % of all other participants in the network.


    A.2. Degree

    Degree is the number of links of each node per day and is calculated by the following formula:

    ki=Nj=1aij (10)

    where aij is as defined in A.1.

    The average degree is defined as follows:

    kavg=Ni=1Nj=1aijN (11)

    The average degree in the sample is around 24, which means that the average participant in the network has links with 24 other participants.


    A.3. Reciprocity

    Reciprocity is the fraction of links with a link in the opposite direction. Garlaschelli and Loffredo (2004) define it as follows:

    ρ=ij(aijc)(ajic)ij(aijc)2 (12)

    where aij and c are as defined in equation (9). Reciprocity measures how likely it is that if there is a link from A to B, that there is also a link from B to A. The average reciprocity in our sample is 0.5, which means that on average half of the in-going links are also out-going.


    A.4. Transitivity

    The transitivity for each single node is calculated as follows:

    Trani=2ziki(ki1) (13)

    where ki refers to the degree as defined in equation (10) and zi denotes the number of links between neighbors of node i. Note that the maximum number of possible connections that the neighbors of node i can have is equal to (ki(ki1))/2

    The transitivity for the whole network is the average of the transitivity of the nodes in the full network, which is shown in the following formula:

    Tranavg=Ni=1TraniN (14)

    Transitivity is also known as clustering coefficient and measures the probability that neighbors of a node are also connected to each other and therefore indicates how well connected the nodes around a certain node are. The average transitivity in our sample is 0.35 which indicates that on average 35 % of the neighbors of a node are connected to each other.


    A.5. Eigenvector centrality

    The eigenvector centrality of node vi can be written as a function of the eigenvector centrality of its neighbors (ce(vj)) in the following way, as explained by Zafarani et al. (2014).

    ce(vi)=1λnj=1Aj,ice(vj) (15)

    where Aj,i denotes the transpose of adjacency matrix A and λ corresponds to an eigenvalue of Aj,i. The eigenvector centrality of all nodes can be written as Ce=(Ce(v1),Ce(v2),...,Ce(v+n))T so equation (15) can be written in matrix notation as follows:

    λCe=ATCe (16)

    where Ce is an eigenvector of adjacency matrix AT and λ the eigenvalue corresponding to Ce. Note that AT is equal to A for all undirected networks. Eigenvector centrality captures not only the amount of links for each node, but also how important each connected node is. Eigenvector centrality increases if a node has more connected nodes that have many connections to other nodes.


    A.6. Hub and authority centrality

    The equation for hub centrality are as follows:

    hi=ijaj=jAijaj=Aa (17)
    ai=jihj=jAjihj=ATh

    where a and h denote the vector of the authority and hub scores of all nodes, Aij denotes the adjacency matrix and Aji the transpose of the adjacency matrix. Hence, h=(AAT)h and a=(ATA)a are the eigenvectors corresponding to eigenvalues of AAT and ATA respectively. Hub and authority centrality show whether the in- and out-going links of nodes are going to or coming from well-connected nodes.


    A.6.1. Interdependency indicator

    n. Turnover relative to AS

    This turnover relative to AS indicator measures liquidity in the whole system and calculates the percentage of the liquidity that originates from Ancillary Systems.


    B. Transaction categories in TARGET2

    Table 2. Categories of transactions in TARGET2.
    Risk indicator 1.1 and 1.2 transactions All transactions
    ARIMA TBATS ARIMA TBATS
    Operational indicators
    Relative performance TARGET2 Y Y Y Y
    Throughput at 12.00 Y Y Y Y
    Throughput at 14.30 Y Y Y Y
    Network properties
    Edge density undirected Y Y Y Y
    Edge density directed Y Y Y Y
    Degree Y Y Y Y
    Reciprocity Y Y Y Y
    Transitivity Y Y Y Y
    Eigenvector centrality Y Y Y Y
    Hub centrality Y Y Y Y
    Authority centrality Y Y Y Y
    links to AS
    Turnover to AS (absolute) Y Y Y Y
    Turnover to AS (relative) Y N Y N
    HHI
    HHI turnover Y Y Y Y
    HHI degree Y Y Y Y
    HHI eigenvector centrality Y Y Y N
    HHI Hub centrality Y Y Y N
    HHI authority centrality Y Y Y Y
    Note: 'Y' indicates that the model recognizes a significant pattern. The identified patterns are the same for week and month.
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    C. Cyclical variation

    Table 3. Cyclical variation presence.
    Risk indicator 1.1 and 1.2 transactions All transactions
    ARIMA TBATS ARIMA TBATS
    Operational indicators
    Relative performance TARGET2 Y Y Y Y
    Throughput at 12.00 Y Y Y Y
    Throughput at 14.30 Y Y Y Y
    Network properties
    Edge density undirected Y Y Y Y
    Edge density directed Y Y Y Y
    Degree Y Y Y Y
    Reciprocity Y Y Y Y
    Transitivity Y Y Y Y
    Eigenvector centrality Y Y Y Y
    Hub centrality Y Y Y Y
    Authority centrality Y Y Y Y
    links to AS
    Turnover to AS (absolute) Y Y Y Y
    Turnover to AS (relative) Y N Y N
    HHI
    HHI turnover Y Y Y Y
    HHI degree Y Y Y Y
    HHI eigenvector centrality Y Y Y N
    HHI Hub centrality Y Y Y N
    HHI authority centrality Y Y Y Y
    Note: 'Y' indicates that the model recognizes a significant pattern. The identified patterns are the same for week and month.
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    D. RMSE forecasting all transactions

    Figure 7. Out-of-sample fit of all indicators for all transactions (except category 4.4) with respect to the naive model.
    Figure 8. Out-of-sample fit of all indicators for all transactions (except category 4.4) with respect to the naive model.



    [1] Xu Z, Yang P, Zheng C, et al. (2018) Analysis on the organization and development of multi-microgrids. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 81: 2204–2216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.032 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.06.032
    [2] Ediriweera WEPS, Lidula NWA (2022) Design and protection of microgrid clusters: A comprehensive review. AIMS Energy 10: 375–411. https://doi.org/10.3934/energy.2022020 doi: 10.3934/energy.2022020
    [3] Saleh MS, Althaibani A, Esa Y, et al. (2015) Impact of clustering microgrids on their stability and resilience during blackouts. 2015 International Conference on Smart Grid and Clean Energy Technologies (ICSGCE), 195–200. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSGCE.2015.7454295 doi: 10.1109/ICSGCE.2015.7454295
    [4] Hossain MJ, Mahmud MA, Milano F, et al. (2015) Design of robust distributed control for interconnected microgrids. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 7: 2724–2735. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2015.2502618 doi: 10.1109/TSG.2015.2502618
    [5] John T, Lam SP (2017) Voltage and frequency control during microgrid islanding in a multi-area multi-microgrid system. IET Gener Transm Dis 11: 1502–1512. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-gtd.2016.1113 doi: 10.1049/iet-gtd.2016.1113
    [6] Liu T (2018) Energy management of cooperative microgrids: A distributed optimization approach. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 96: 335–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2017.10.021 doi: 10.1016/j.ijepes.2017.10.021
    [7] Choobineh M, Silva-Ortiz D, Mohagheghi S (2018) An automation scheme for emergency operation of a multi-microgrid industrial park. IEEE Trans Ind Appl 54: 6450–6459. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIA.2018.2851210 doi: 10.1109/TIA.2018.2851210
    [8] Gregoratti D, Matamoros J (2015) Distributed energy trading: The multiple-microgrid case. IEEE Trans Ind Electron 62: 2551–2559. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIE.2014.2352592 doi: 10.1109/TIE.2014.2352592
    [9] Li Z, Shahidehpour M, Aminifar F, et al. (2017) Networked microgrids for enhancing the power system resilience. Proc IEEE 105: 1289–1310. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2017.2685558 doi: 10.1109/JPROC.2017.2685558
    [10] Wang Y, Rousis AO, Strbac G (2021) A three-level planning model for optimal sizing of networked microgrids considering a trade-off between resilience and cost. IEEE Trans Power Syst 36: 5657–5669. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2021.3076128 doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2021.3076128
    [11] Baghbanzadeh D, Salehi J, Gazijahani FS, et al. (2021) Resilience improvement of multi-microgrid distribution networks using distributed generation. Sustainable Energy Grids Netw 27: 100503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.segan.2021.100503 doi: 10.1016/j.segan.2021.100503
    [12] Xie H, Teng X, Xu Y, et al. (2019) Optimal energy storage sizing for networked microgrids considering reliability and resilience. IEEE Access 7: 86336–86348. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2922994 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2922994
    [13] Salehi N, Martínez-García H, Velasco-Quesada G (2022) Component sizing of an isolated networked hybrid microgrid based on operating reserve analysis. Energies 15: 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15176259 doi: 10.3390/en15176259
    [14] Wang Y, Rousis AO, Strbac G (2022) Resilience-driven optimal sizing and pre-positioning of mobile energy storage systems in decentralized networked microgrids. Appl Energy 305: 117921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117921 doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117921
    [15] Lokesh V, Badar AQH (2023) Optimal sizing of res and bess in networked microgrids based on proportional peer-to-peer and peer-to-grid energy trading. Energy Storage 5: 464. https://doi.org/10.1002/est2.464 doi: 10.1002/est2.464
    [16] Ali L, Muyeen SM, Ghosh A, et al. (2020) Optimal sizing of networked microgrid using game theory considering the peer-to-peer energy trading. 2020 2nd International Conference on Smart Power and Internet Energy Systems (SPIES), 322–326. https://doi.org/10.1109/SPIES48661.2020.9243067 doi: 10.1109/SPIES48661.2020.9243067
    [17] Wang Z, Chen B, Wang J, et al. (2016) Networked microgrids for self-healing power systems. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 7: 310–319. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2015.2427513 doi: 10.1109/TSG.2015.2427513
    [18] Chen C, Wang J, Ton D (2017) Modernizing distribution system restoration to achieve grid resiliency against extreme weather events: An integrated solution. Proc IEEE 105: 1267–1288. https://doi.org/10.1109/JPROC.2017.2684780 doi: 10.1109/JPROC.2017.2684780
    [19] Ali AY, Hussain A, Baek JW, et al. (2021) Optimal operation of networked microgrids for enhancing resilience using mobile electric vehicles. Energies 14: 142. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14010142 doi: 10.3390/en14010142
    [20] Wang Y, Rousis AO, Strbac G (2021) A resilience enhancement strategy for networked microgrids incorporating electricity and transport and utilizing a stochastic hierarchical control approach. Sustainable Energy Grids Netw 26: 100464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.segan.2021.100464 doi: 10.1016/j.segan.2021.100464
    [21] Teimourzadeh S, Tor OB, Cebeci ME, et al. (2019) A three-stage approach for resilience-constrained scheduling of networked microgrids. J Mod Power Syst Clean Energy 7: 705–715. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40565-019-0555-0 doi: 10.1007/s40565-019-0555-0
    [22] Tostado-Vexliz M, Hasanien HM, Jordehi AR, et al. (2023) An interval-based privacy-aware optimization framework for electricity price setting in isolated microgrid clusters. Appl Energy 340: 121041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.121041 doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.121041
    [23] Tostado-Vexliz M, Kamel S, Aymen F, et al. (2022) A stochastic-IGDT model for energy management in isolated microgrids considering failures and demand response. Appl Energy 317: 119162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119162 doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119162
    [24] Tostado-Vexliz M, Hasanien HM, Jordehi AR, et al. (2023) Risk-averse optimal participation of a DR-intensive microgrid in competitive clusters considering response fatigue. Appl Energy 339: 120960. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.120960 doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.120960
    [25] Schneider KP, Radhakrishnan N, Tang Y, et al. (2019) Improving primary frequency response to support networked microgrid operations. IEEE Trans Power Syst 34: 659–667. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2018.2859742 doi: 10.1109/TPWRS.2018.2859742
    [26] Miao Y, Hynan P, Jouanne AV, et al. (2019) Current li-ion battery technologies in electric vehicles and opportunities for advancements. Energies 12: 1074. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12061074 doi: 10.3390/en12061074
    [27] Mitali J, Dhinakaran S, Mohamad A (2022) Energy storage systems: A review. Energy Storage Sav 1: 166–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enss.2022.07.002 doi: 10.1016/j.enss.2022.07.002
    [28] Tian H, Qin P, Li K, et al. (2020) A review of the state of health for lithium-ion batteries: Research status and suggestions. J Clean Prod 261: 120813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120813 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120813
    [29] Rezvanizaniani SM, Liu Z, Chen Y, et al. (2014) Review and recent advances in battery health monitoring and prognostics technologies for electric vehicle (ev) safety and mobility. J Power Sources 256: 110–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2014.01.085 doi: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2014.01.085
    [30] Mit EV (2008) A guide to understanding battery specifications. Massachussetts Institute of Technology. Available from: http://web.mit.edu/evt/summary_battery_specifications.pdf.
    [31] Ma S, Jiang M, Tao P, et al. (2018) Temperature effect and thermal impact in lithium-ion batteries: A review. Prog Nat Sci Mater Int 28: 653–666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnsc.2018.11.002 doi: 10.1016/j.pnsc.2018.11.002
    [32] Jayasena KNC, Jayamaha DKJS, Lidula NWA, et al. (2019) SoC based multi-mode battery energy management system for dc microgrids. 2019 Moratuwa Engineering Research Conference (MERCon), 468–473. https://doi.org/10.1109/MERCon.2019.8818765 doi: 10.1109/MERCon.2019.8818765
    [33] Pogaku N, Prodanovic M, Green TC (2007) Modeling, analysis and testing of autonomous operation of an inverter-based microgrid. IEEE Trans Power Electron 22: 613–625. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2006.890003 doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2006.890003
    [34] Ediriweera WS, Lidula N, Herath HDB (2023) Robust microgrids for distribution systems with high solar photovoltaic penetration. Arch Electr Eng 72: 785–809. http://dx.doi.org/10.24425/aee.2023.146050 doi: 10.24425/aee.2023.146050
    [35] Guo X, Guo H (2011) Simulation and control strategy of a micro-turbine generation system for grid connected and islanding operations. Energy Proc 12: 368–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2011.10.050 doi: 10.1016/j.egypro.2011.10.050
    [36] Shao W, Wu R, Ran L, et al. (2020) A power module for grid inverter with in-built short-circuit fault current capability. IEEE Trans Power Electron 35: 10567–10579. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2020.2978656 doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2020.2978656
    [37] Pan C, Tao S, Fan H, et al. (2021) Multi-objective optimization of a battery-supercapacitor hybrid energy storage system based on the concept of cyber-physical system. Electronics 10: 1801. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10151801 doi: 10.3390/electronics10151801
    [38] Naseri F, Farjah E, Allahbakhshi M, et al. (2017) Online condition monitoring and fault detection of large supercapacitor banks in electric vehicle applications. IET Electr Sys Transp 7: 318–326. https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-est.2017.0013 doi: 10.1049/iet-est.2017.0013
    [39] Yang H (2018) Estimation of supercapacitor charge capacity bounds considering charge redistribution. IEEE Trans Power Electron 33: 6980–6993. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2017.2764423 doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2017.2764423
    [40] Kalbitz R, Puhane F (2022) Supercapacitor—A guide for the design-in process. Wurth Elektronik, Tech Rep. Available from: https://www.we-online.com/en/support/knowledge/application-notes?d = anp077-supercapacitor.
    [41] Qoria T, Cossart Q, Li C, et al. (2018) Wp3-control and operation of a grid with 100% converter-based devices. deliverable 3.2: Local control and simulation tools for large transmission systems. H2020 MIGRATE project. Available from: https://www.h2020-migrate.eu, 2018.
    [42] Paquette AD, Divan DM (2015) Virtual impedance current limiting for inverters in microgrids with synchronous generators. IEEE Trans Ind Appl 51: 1630–1638. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIA.2014.2345877 doi: 10.1109/TIA.2014.2345877
    [43] Behabtu HA, Messagie M, Coosemans T, et al. (2020) A review of energy storage technologies' application potentials in renewable energy sources grid integration. Sustainability 12: 10511. https://doi.org/10.3390/su122410511 doi: 10.3390/su122410511
    [44] Georgious R, Refaat R, Garcia J, et al. (2021) Review on energy storage systems in microgrids. Electronics 10: 2134. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10172134 doi: 10.3390/electronics10172134
    [45] Wang H, Blaabjerg F (2014) Reliability of capacitors for dc-link applications in power electronic converters—An overview. IEEE Trans Ind Appl 50: 3569–3578. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIA.2014.2308357 doi: 10.1109/TIA.2014.2308357
    [46] Susanto J, Shahnia F, Ghosh A, et al. (2014) Interconnected microgrids via back-to-back converters for dynamic frequency support. 2014 Australasian Universities Power Engineering Conference (AUPEC), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/AUPEC.2014.6966616 doi: 10.1109/AUPEC.2014.6966616
    [47] Worku MY, Hassan MA, Abido MA (2019) Real time energy management and control of renewable energy based microgrid in grid connected and island modes. Energies 12: 276. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12020276 doi: 10.3390/en12020276
    [48] Chakraborty S, Kramer B, Kroposki B (2009) A review of power electronics interfaces for distributed energy systems towards achieving low-cost modular design. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 13: 2323–2335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.05.005 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2009.05.005
    [49] Blaabjerg F, Chen Z, Kjaer S (2004) Power electronics as efficient interface in dispersed power generation systems. IEEE Trans Power Electron 19: 1184–1194. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPEL.2004.833453 doi: 10.1109/TPEL.2004.833453
    [50] Pawel S (2014) Matrix converter interfaces two three-phase AC systems as a component of smart-grid. 2014 International Symposium on Power Electronics, Electrical Drives, Automation and Motion, 683–688. https://doi.org/10.1109/SPEEDAM.2014.6872047 doi: 10.1109/SPEEDAM.2014.6872047
    [51] Carvalho EL, Blinov A, Chub A, et al. (2022) Grid integration of dc buildings: Standards, requirements and power converter topologies. IEEE Open J Power Electron 3: 798–823. https://doi.org/10.1109/OJPEL.2022.3217741 doi: 10.1109/OJPEL.2022.3217741
    [52] Yuan Y, Chang L, Song P (2007) A new front-end converter with extended hold-up time. 2007 Large Engineering Systems Conference on Power Engineering, 275–278. https://doi.org/10.1109/LESCPE.2007.4437392 doi: 10.1109/LESCPE.2007.4437392
    [53] Electromagnetic compatibility part 4–11: Testing and measurement techniques voltage dips, short interruptions and voltage variations immunity tests. International Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva, Switzerland, Standard IEC 61000-4-11: 2020, 2020. Available from: https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/63503.
    [54] IEEE standard for the specification of microgrid controllers. IEEE, 1–43, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEESTD.2018.8340204
    [55] IEEE standard for interconnection and interoperability of distributed energy resources with associated electric power systems interfaces. IEEE Std 1547-2018 (Revision of IEEE Std 1547-2003), 1–138, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEEESTD.2018.8332112
    [56] Anderson WW (2020) Resilience assessment of islanded renewable energy microgrids. Available from: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/AD1126753.
    [57] Ediriweera WEPS, Lidula NWA (2023) Adaptive load shedding technique for energy management in networked microgrids. 2023 IEEE 17th International Conference on Industrial and Information Systems (ICIIS), 465–470. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIIS58898.2023.10253509 doi: 10.1109/ICIIS58898.2023.10253509
    [58] Ediriweera WEPS, Lidula NWA (2023) Adaptive droop controller for energy management of islanded AC microgrids. 2023 Moratuwa Engineering Research Conference (MERCon), 292–297. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MERCon60487.2023.10355428 doi: 10.1109/MERCon60487.2023.10355428
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Ronald Heijmans, Chen Zhou, Outlier Detection in TARGET2 Risk Indicators, 2019, 1556-5068, 10.2139/ssrn.3332441
    2. Leonard Sabetti, Ronald Heijmans, Shallow or Deep? Detecting Anomalous Flows in the Canadian Automated Clearing and Settlement System using an Autoencoder, 2020, 1556-5068, 10.2139/ssrn.3581595
    3. Simona Hašková, An alternative approach for estimating GDP growth rate: fuzzy prediction model, 2019, 25, 18039782, 55, 10.15240/tul/004/2019-2-004
    4. Leonard Sabetti, Ronald Heijmans, Shallow or deep? Training an autoencoder to detect anomalous flows in a retail payment system, 2021, 2, 26661438, 100031, 10.1016/j.latcb.2021.100031
    5. Tetiana SUNDUK, Oksana KALYTA, Financial market indicators in the context of European integration, 2022, 11, 2786-5517, 9, 10.37634/efp.2022.11.2
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2024 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(1378) PDF downloads(105) Cited by(0)

Article outline

Figures and Tables

Figures(17)  /  Tables(8)

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog