lanl-ansi
solve_pf() does not work with LPACCPowerModel
Run this small example using PGLIB to reproduce the error:
using PowerModels
using Ipopt
pglib_path = "../pglib-opf"
case = "pglib_opf_case14_ieee.m"
case_file = joinpath(pglib_path, case)
result_lpac = solve_pf(case_file, LPACCPowerModel, Ipopt.Optimizer)
print_summary(result_lpac["solution"])
It results in the following error:
[info | PowerModels]: removing 3 cost terms from generator 4: Float64[]
[info | PowerModels]: removing 1 cost terms from generator 1: [792.0951, 0.0]
[info | PowerModels]: removing 3 cost terms from generator 5: Float64[]
[info | PowerModels]: removing 1 cost terms from generator 2: [2326.9494, 0.0]
[info | PowerModels]: removing 3 cost terms from generator 3: Float64[]
ERROR: MethodError: no method matching expression_branch_power_ohms_yt_from(::LPACCPowerModel, ::Int64, ::Int64, ::Int64, ::Tuple{Int64, Int64, Int64}, ::Tuple{Int64, Int64, Int64}, ::Float64, ::Float64, ::Float64, ::Float64, ::Float64, ::Float64, ::Float64)
Closest candidates are:
expression_branch_power_ohms_yt_from(::AbstractACPModel, ::Int64, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any) at C:\Users\rech_ge\.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\form\acp.jl:234
expression_branch_power_ohms_yt_from(::AbstractACRModel, ::Int64, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any) at C:\Users\rech_ge\.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\form\acr.jl:166
expression_branch_power_ohms_yt_from(::AbstractDCMPPModel, ::Int64, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any) at C:\Users\rech_ge\.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\form\dcp.jl:103
...
Stacktrace:
[1] expression_branch_power_ohms_yt_from(pm::LPACCPowerModel, i::Int64; nw::Int64)
@ PowerModels C:\Users\rech_ge\.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\core\expression_template.jl:88
[2] expression_branch_power_ohms_yt_from(pm::LPACCPowerModel, i::Int64)
@ PowerModels C:\Users\rech_ge\.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\core\expression_template.jl:69
[3] build_pf(pm::LPACCPowerModel)
@ PowerModels C:\Users\rech_ge\.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\prob\pf.jl:23
[4] instantiate_model(data::Dict{String, Any}, model_type::Type, build_method::typeof(build_pf), ref_add_core!::typeof(ref_add_core!), global_keys::Set{String}, it::Symbol; ref_extensions::Vector{Any}, kwargs::Base.Pairs{Symbol, Union{}, Tuple{}, NamedTuple{(), Tuple{}}})
@ InfrastructureModels C:\Users\rech_ge\.julia\packages\InfrastructureModels\C2xBM\src\core\base.jl:370
[5] #instantiate_model#321
@ C:\Users\rech_ge\.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\core\base.jl:67 [inlined]
[6] solve_model(data::Dict{String, Any}, model_type::Type, optimizer::Type, build_method::typeof(build_pf); ref_extensions::Vector{Any}, solution_processors::Vector{Any}, relax_integrality::Bool, multinetwork::Bool, multiconductor::Bool, kwargs::Base.Pairs{Symbol, Union{}, Tuple{}, NamedTuple{(), Tuple{}}})
@ PowerModels C:\Users\rech_ge\.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\core\base.jl:48
[7] solve_model(data::Dict{String, Any}, model_type::Type, optimizer::Type, build_method::Function)
@ PowerModels C:\Users\rech_ge\.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\core\base.jl:35
[8] solve_model(file::String, model_type::Type, optimizer::Type, build_method::Function; kwargs::Base.Pairs{Symbol, Union{}, Tuple{}, NamedTuple{(), Tuple{}}})
@ PowerModels C:\Users\rech_ge\.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\core\base.jl:27
[9] solve_model
@ C:\Users\rech_ge\.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\core\base.jl:26 [inlined]
[10] #solve_pf#1065
@ C:\Users\rech_ge\.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\prob\pf.jl:13 [inlined]
[11] solve_pf(file::String, model_type::Type, optimizer::Type)
@ PowerModels C:\Users\rech_ge\.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\prob\pf.jl:13
[12] top-level scope
@ REPL[8]:1
Right now the LPAC model is only supported for OPF. In this example you are running PF. I will leave this issue open to explore how this could be supported in the future.
On Thu, Oct 5, 2023 at 5:14 AM Gereon Recht @.***> wrote:
Run this small example using PGLIB https://github.com/power-grid-lib/pglib-opf to reproduce the error:
using PowerModelsusing Ipopt
pglib_path = "../pglib-opf" case = "pglib_opf_case14_ieee.m"
case_file = joinpath(pglib_path, case)
result_lpac = solve_pf(case_file, LPACCPowerModel, Ipopt.Optimizer) print_summary(result_lpac["solution"])
It results in the following error:
[info | PowerModels]: removing 3 cost terms from generator 4: Float64[] [info | PowerModels]: removing 1 cost terms from generator 1: [792.0951, 0.0] [info | PowerModels]: removing 3 cost terms from generator 5: Float64[] [info | PowerModels]: removing 1 cost terms from generator 2: [2326.9494, 0.0] [info | PowerModels]: removing 3 cost terms from generator 3: Float64[] ERROR: MethodError: no method matching expression_branch_power_ohms_yt_from(::LPACCPowerModel, ::Int64, ::Int64, ::Int64, ::Tuple{Int64, Int64, Int64}, ::Tuple{Int64, Int64, Int64}, ::Float64, ::Float64, ::Float64, ::Float64, ::Float64, ::Float64, ::Float64) Closest candidates are: expression_branch_power_ohms_yt_from(::AbstractACPModel, ::Int64, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any) at C:\Users\rech_ge.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\form\acp.jl:234 expression_branch_power_ohms_yt_from(::AbstractACRModel, ::Int64, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any) at C:\Users\rech_ge.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\form\acr.jl:166 expression_branch_power_ohms_yt_from(::AbstractDCMPPModel, ::Int64, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any, ::Any) at C:\Users\rech_ge.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\form\dcp.jl:103 ... Stacktrace: [1] expression_branch_power_ohms_yt_from(pm::LPACCPowerModel, i::Int64; nw::Int64) @ PowerModels C:\Users\rech_ge.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\core\expression_template.jl:88 [2] expression_branch_power_ohms_yt_from(pm::LPACCPowerModel, i::Int64) @ PowerModels C:\Users\rech_ge.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\core\expression_template.jl:69 [3] build_pf(pm::LPACCPowerModel) @ PowerModels C:\Users\rech_ge.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\prob\pf.jl:23 [4] instantiate_model(data::Dict{String, Any}, model_type::Type, build_method::typeof(build_pf), ref_add_core!::typeof(ref_add_core!), global_keys::Set{String}, it::Symbol; ref_extensions::Vector{Any}, kwargs::Base.Pairs{Symbol, Union{}, Tuple{}, NamedTuple{(), Tuple{}}}) @ InfrastructureModels C:\Users\rech_ge.julia\packages\InfrastructureModels\C2xBM\src\core\base.jl:370 [5] #instantiate_model#321 @ C:\Users\rech_ge.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\core\base.jl:67 [inlined] [6] solve_model(data::Dict{String, Any}, model_type::Type, optimizer::Type, build_method::typeof(build_pf); ref_extensions::Vector{Any}, solution_processors::Vector{Any}, relax_integrality::Bool, multinetwork::Bool, multiconductor::Bool, kwargs::Base.Pairs{Symbol, Union{}, Tuple{}, NamedTuple{(), Tuple{}}}) @ PowerModels C:\Users\rech_ge.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\core\base.jl:48 [7] solve_model(data::Dict{String, Any}, model_type::Type, optimizer::Type, build_method::Function) @ PowerModels C:\Users\rech_ge.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\core\base.jl:35 [8] solve_model(file::String, model_type::Type, optimizer::Type, build_method::Function; kwargs::Base.Pairs{Symbol, Union{}, Tuple{}, NamedTuple{(), Tuple{}}}) @ PowerModels C:\Users\rech_ge.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\core\base.jl:27 [9] solve_model @ C:\Users\rech_ge.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\core\base.jl:26 [inlined] [10] #solve_pf#1065 @ C:\Users\rech_ge.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\prob\pf.jl:13 [inlined] [11] solve_pf(file::String, model_type::Type, optimizer::Type) @ PowerModels C:\Users\rech_ge.julia\packages\PowerModels\bcmVu\src\prob\pf.jl:13 [12] top-level scope @ REPL[8]:1
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/lanl-ansi/PowerModels.jl/issues/891, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAIN5KSKIZ5QAB64ILTNSATX5Z26VAVCNFSM6AAAAAA5T5RLI2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43ASLTON2WKOZRHEZDONZYGE4TCOI . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: @.***>
I though of a reasonable workaround for this issue.
If you would like to solve a PF problem with a formulation that does not currently support PF you can instead pose your PF problem as an OPF problem where the generator cost functions are constant values or identical linear functions.