4th

SEERC
Electric Transmission
CONFERENCE
Oral Presentation Article ID: 95

Classification of Power Quality Events in the

Transmission Grid: Comparative Evaluation of
Different Machine Learning Models
umut.guvengir@tubitak.gov.tr
Umut GÜVENGİR*, Dilek KÜÇÜK, Serkan BUHAN,
TÜBİTAK Marmara Research Center

Cuma Alİ MANTAŞ, Murathan YENİCELİ

Turkish Electricity Transmission Corp. (TEİAŞ)

Turkiye

SUMMARY
Automatic classification of electric power quality events with respect to their root causes is critical for electrical grid management. In
this paper, we present comparative evaluation results of an extensive set of machine learning models for the classification of power
quality events, based on their root causes. After extensive experiments using different machine learning libraries, it is observed that
the best performing learning models turn out to be Cubic SVM and XGBoost. During error analysis, it is observed that the main source
of performance degradation for both models is the classification of ABC faults as ABCG faults, or vice versa. Ultimately, the models
achieving the best results will be integrated into the event classification module of a large-scale power quality and grid monitoring
system for the Turkish electricity transmission system.

1. INTRODUCTION
Automatic detection, monitoring, analysis, and classification of power quality events are crucial for effective management of the
electricity transmission grid. Classification of power quality events has been extensively studied in the literature, especially in the last
two decades. In the context of designing the event classification module, relevant articles in the literature have been systematically
reviewed and categorized in terms of the methods and algorithms used in these studies. Although obtaining raw data, dividing the
data into parts, and processing the data using signal processing methods are common and standard stages in event classification
studies, extracting the necessary features of the data to be used in classification algorithms, selecting the best features among
these extracted features, and classifying these selected features using different methods and algorithms can increase the accuracy
of classification. Various signal transformations are used in the feature extraction stage while metaheuristic optimization algorithms
are preferred in the feature selection stage. Finally, machine learning algorithms, including deep learning-based algorithms, are used
in the classification stage.
In this work, we present he evaluation results of different machine learning models for the classification of power quality events
with respect to their root causes. At the end of our tests, the classification of possible root causes of events is achieved with high
accuracy by using different machine learning algorithms. The best performing models will be integrated into the event classification
module of a large-scale AI-based power quality and grid monitoring system designed and implemented for the Turkish electrical grid.
Further comparative tests will also be conducted using deep learning models, as part of future work. In the rest of the paper, first
a survey of relevant studies is presented, next, evaluation results of the machine learning-based event classification are provided,
316

after a discussion of these significant results, the paper is concluded with a summary of points.

KEYWORDS
Proceeding e-Book

Power quality event, fault classification, machine learning, artificial intelligence

 4th
SEERC
Electric Transmission
CONFERENCE
Oral Presentation: Classification of Power Quality Events in the Transmission Grid: Comparative Evaluation of
Different Machine Learning Models

2. LITERATURE SURVEY
Articles published on event classification in the literature generally focus on the classification of event types itself, and there are
relatively fewer studies on the classification of possible root causes of events. Since the methods and algorithms used in feature
extraction, feature selection, and classification stages in event classification can also be used in the classification of event causes,
articles that do not focus on event causes have also been examined.
In the process of classifying the causes of an event, it is crucial to extract the necessary features from the signal by processing
the raw data correctly. Classification algorithms only work efficiently when the relevant features of the signals are extracted. For
this stage, many different signal processing methods have been proposed and employed in the literature. Wavelet Transform
(WT) based methods have gained more popularity recently with the utilization of Continuous Wavelet Transform (CWT), and more
frequently Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT). Although the selection of the mother wavelet function is crucial for this method,
the Daubechies-4 (db4) mother wavelet is mostly used in the literature as it detects fast transient signals with higher accuracy in
power quality studies [1-3]. The DWT method is preferred more due to its minimum processing time and high accuracy compared
to other signal processing methods which include Stockwell Transform (S-Transform), Hilbert Huang Transform (HHT), and Curvelet
Transform (CT) [4-6]. After applying the selected signal processing method to the raw event data, statistical features such as
mean value, maximum value, variance, standard deviation, RMS, kurtosis, skewness, and entropy are calculated to generate the
scalar features of the signals to be utilized during the classification stage [3]. It is also commonly observed in the literature that
metaheuristic optimization algorithms, clustering, and dimension reduction methods are utilized for selecting the optimal subset of
the feature set to prevent high variance and overfitting problems in the classification stage [3, 7, 8].
Rule-based algorithms and expert systems were mainly used for classification purposes in the studies conducted in the last decade;
however, machine learning algorithms, including deep learning-based algorithms, are applied more frequently in the current studies
in parallel with the recent developments in the field of artificial intelligence [9]. Furthermore, it has been observed that classification
of the root causes of events is performed with combined (ensemble) algorithms which involves application of multiple algorithms
together [1].
Some notable machine learning algorithms include Artificial Neural Network (ANN), which has an adaptive structure and improve its
performance by adjusting its parameters during the training process, Support Vector Machine (SVM), which is a vector space-based
classification algorithm that finds a linear or nonlinear multidimensional decision boundary that separates a dataset into two distinct
parts, K-Means Clustering and K-Nearest Neighbor (KNN) algorithms, which are methods to reveal hidden patterns in data by dividing
it into groups containing similar objects [10-13]. Other machine learning algorithms include Logistic Regression (LR), Decision Tree
(DT), Extreme Learning Machine (ELM), and XGBoost [1, 4, 14]. Although deep learning is often referred to as a separate category
of artificial intelligence, it is often considered as a subcategory of machine learning, as well. Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN)
are particularly used in the field of image processing whereas Recurrent Neural Networks (RNN) are mainly utilized for time-series
data [15, 16]. Autoencoders are also found to be effective in detecting the relationships in the input data [17]. Some notable studies
about the classification of root causes of events can be found in [3, 4, 9, 10, 18-23].

3. EVALUATION OF EVENT CLASSIFICATION MODELS

3.1. Power Quality Events
The purpose of the event classification is primarily to identify a wide range of root causes of faults and events by recognizing
waveforms on the power quality and grid monitoring system. In this study, there are 13 event classes considered, the first 11 of
which correspond to transmission system faults: AG, BG, CG, ABG, ACG, BCG, ABCG, AB, AC, BC, ABC faults, line energizing, and
line de-energizing. There will also be more additions of root causes of events to be classified by the module in the future such as
induction motor starting, transformer energizing, capacitor and reactor switching.

3.2 Classification Models and Features

317

In the feature extraction stage, DWT method has been used. With the DWT method, the three-phase voltage and current signals
in each data have been transformed into 5 detailed and 1 approximate coefficient signals using the 5-level db4 mother wavelet.
Proceeding e-Book

To convert these coefficient signals into scalar magnitudes, statistical features such as mean, standard deviation (SD), root-mean-
square (RMS), energy, skewness, kurtosis, Shannon entropy, and maximum bandwidth have been used. These calculated scalar
magnitudes are used later as extracted features specific to the signal in the classification stage.
 4th
SEERC
Electric Transmission
Machines and Power Electronics
CONFERENCE
Oral Presentation: Classification of Power Quality Events in the Transmission Grid: Comparative Evaluation of
Different Machine Learning Models

Machine learning algorithms (without deep learning algorithms) have been currently used during the classification stage, yet, as part
of future work, deep learning based machine learning algorithms will be employed for classification, as well. The feature set obtained
by processing the event data are used during the classification phase, both using the algorithms in the “Classification Learner”
module of the MATLAB platform and various machine learning algorithms implemented in the scikit-learn open-source machine
learning library1 implemented with the Python programming language. These algorithms generally include statistical algorithms such
as ANN, SVM, DT, and clustering methods. There are 30 different classifiers (including various derivatives of these models) in the
“Classification Learner” module of the MATLAB platform, and 8 different classifiers are applied in the Python environment.

3.3 Training and Test Datasets

Training and test datasets are created using PSCAD simulation software; however, real events collected from the Turkish electricity
transmission grid will be classified in the aforementioned grid monitoring system. The datasets comprise 150 training and 150
testing samples for each class where these samples are produced with the sampling frequency of 4 kHz and each sample includes
3-phase voltage and current data for 0.25 seconds. To ensure data diversity, the time of the fault occurrence, the fault resistance,
the location where the fault occurred on the transmission line, the operation time of the circuit breaker, the resistance, inductance
and capacitance values of the load were changed as parameters in a wide range.

3.4. Evaluation Results

Firstly, 30 machine learning models in MATLAB software are trained and tested on the datasets. The evaluation results are presented
in Table 1 where the best and worst performing models and their accuracies are shown in boldface.

Table 1. Evaluation Results of Machine Learning Models in MATLAB

Model Accuracy Model Accuracy

Cubic SVM 97.5% Wide Neural Network (NN) 92.3%

Linear SVM 97.0% Trilayered NN 92.1%

Linear Discriminant 96.7% Cosine KNN 92.0%

Medium NN 96.1% SVM Kernel 91.0%

Medium Gaussian SVM 96.1% Gaussian Naive Bayes 89.8%

Coarse Gaussian SVM 96.0% Bagged Trees 92.5%

Quadratic SVM 95.3% Logistic Regression Kernel 89.8%

Fine KNN 94.8% Cubic KNN 88.5%

Narrow NN 93.9% Kernel Naive Bayes 88.2%

Boosted Trees 93.7% Medium Tree 87.1%

Subspace Discriminant 93.5% RUSBoosted Trees 87.1%

Weighted KNN 93.4% Fine Tree 87.0%

Bilayered NN 93.2% Coarse KNN 77.1%

Subspace KNN 92.8% Fine Gaussian SVM 36.6%

Medium KNN 92.5% Coarse Tree 29.3%

318

Next, similar tests are performed using the open-source scikit-learn machine learning library written in Python and evaluation results
Proceeding e-Book

of 8 machine learning models are shown in Table 2.

1 https://scikit-learn.org/
 4th
SEERC
Electric Transmission
Machines and Power Electronics
CONFERENCE
Oral Presentation: Classification of Power Quality Events in the Transmission Grid: Comparative Evaluation of
Different Machine Learning Models

Table 2. Evaluation Results of Machine Learning Models in scikit-learn Library

Model Accuracy Model Accuracy

XGBoost 97.0% RBF SVC 92.7%

Linear SVC 96.6% Decision Tree 91.9%

Logistic Regression 94.1% Random Forest 90.7%

KNN 93.3% Gaussian Naive Bayes 90.2%

As the best performing algorithm, the confusion matrix of the Cubic SVM algorithm is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Confusion Matrix for the Cubic SVM Algorithm

4. DISCUSSION OF THE RESULTS

It can be seen from Table 1 and 2 that the Cubic SVM algorithm, which is a variation of the SVM algorithm, succeeded the
classification of 13 different event cause types with a high accuracy of 97.5% in MATLAB whereas the XGBoost algorithm, which is a
DT algorithm, achieved this classification with a high accuracy of 97% in the scikit-learn library of Python. As can be observed from
the confusion matrix in Figure 1, the algorithm classifies almost all event cause types with high accuracy, but makes a few mistakes
when distinguishing between actual ABC and ABCG faults, which stands as the main source of performance degradation for both
models.
As part of future work based on the current study:
• Similar experiments will be performed after fine-tuning model parameters.
• Deep learning models will be tested and compared with machine learning models.
319

• A wider range of (finer granularity) event classes will be considered during classification.
• Other statistical features and feature extraction methods will be applied to the current problem settings.
Proceeding e-Book

• The best performing machine learning models will be integrated into the large-scale electric power quality and grid monitoring
system (called TEKİS), a preliminary version of which was presented in [24].
 4th
SEERC
Electric Transmission
Machines and Power Electronics
CONFERENCE
Oral Presentation: Classification of Power Quality Events in the Transmission Grid: Comparative Evaluation of
Different Machine Learning Models

5. CONCLUSION
In this study, we present the evaluation results of an extensive set of machine learning models for the classification of power quality
events with respect to their root causes. The corresponding tests are performed in two distinct platforms: MATLAB tool and scikit-
learn open-source machine learning platform. It is observed that the highest performing model in the MATLAB platform is Cubic
SVM and the best performing model in scikit-learn library is XGBoost. The best performing models will be integrated into the event
classification module of a large-scale nationwide grid monitoring system. Deep learning models and finer granularity event classes
will be employed as part of future studies.

6. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research and technology development work is carried out within the scope of TEİAŞ Electric Power Quality and Grid Monitoring
System (TEKİS) Project (with project number 5212802) developed for TEİAŞ by TÜBİTAK Marmara Research Center.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1] P. Radhakrishnan, K. Ramaiyan, A. Vinayagam, & V. Veerasamy “A stacking ensemble classification model for detection and classification of power quality
disturbances in PV integrated power network” (Measurement, 2021, 175)
[2] Z. Dawood, C. K. Babulal “Power quality disturbance classification based on efficient adaptive Arrhenius artificial bee colony feature selection” (Int Trans Electr
Energ Syst., 31, 2021)
[3] H. Erişti, Ö. Yıldırım, B. Erişti, & Y. Demir “Optimal feature selection for classification of the power quality events using wavelet transform and least squares
support vector machines” (International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 49, 2013, pages 95-103)
[4] H. Erişti, Ö. Yıldırım, B. Erişti, & Y. Demir “Automatic recognition system of underlying causes of power quality disturbances based on S-Transform and Extreme
Learning Machine” (International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 61, 2014, pages 553-562)
[5] M. Sahani, & P. K. Dash “Automatic power quality events recognition based on Hilbert Huang Transform and weighted bidirectional Extreme Learning Machine”
(IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 14(9), 2018, pages 3849-3858)
[6] I. S. Samanta, P. K. Rout, & S. Mishra “Feature extraction and power quality event classification using Curvelet transform and optimized Extreme Learning
Machine” (Electrical Engineering, 103, 2021, pages 2431-2446)
[7] O. A. Alimi, K. Ouahada, A. M. Abu-Mahfouz, & S. Rimer “Power system events classification using genetic algorithm based feature weighting technique for
support vector machine” (Heliyon, 7(1), 2021)
[8] R. Hooshmand, & A. Enshaee “Detection and classification of single and combined power quality disturbances using fuzzy systems oriented by particle swarm
optimization algorithm” (Electric Power Systems Research, 80(12), 2010, pages 1552-1561)
[9] S. Xie, F. Xiao, Q. Ai, & G. Zhou “Classification of underlying causes of power quality disturbances using data fusion” (2018 International Conference on Power
System Technology (POWERCON), 2018, pages 4118-4123)
[10] R. J. Haddad, B. Guha, Y. Kalaani, & A. El-Shahat “Smart distributed generation systems using artificial neural network-based event classification” (IEEE Power
and Energy Technology Systems Journal, 5(2), 2018, pages 18-26)
[11] M. Shafiullah, M. J. Rana, M. E. Haque, A. Islam, S. M. Rahman, M. S. Alam, & A. Ali “An intelligent approach for power quality events detection and classification”
(2021 1st International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Data Analytics (CAIDA), 2021, pages 194-199)
[12] Rahul & B. Choudhary “An advanced genetic algorithm with improved support vector machine for multi-class classification of real power quality events”
(Electric Power Systems Research, 191, 2021)
[13] Y. Liu, T. Jin, M. A. Mohamed, & Q. Wang “A novel three-step classification approach based on time-dependent spectral features for complex power quality
disturbances” (IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, 70, 2021, pages 1-14)
[14] L. Yang, Y. Li, & C. Di “Application of XGBoost in identification of power quality disturbance source of steady-state disturbance events” (2019 IEEE 9th
International Conference on Electronics Information and Emergency Communication (ICEIEC), 2019, pages 1-6)
[15] C. I. Garcia, F. Grasso, A. Luchetta, M. C. Piccirilli, L. Paolucci, & G. Talluri “A comparison of power quality disturbance detection and classification methods
using CNN, LSTM and CNN-LSTM” (Applied Sciences, 10(19), 2020, page 6755)
[16] R. Machlev, A. Chachkes, J. Belikov, Y. Beck, & Y. Levron “Open source dataset generator for power quality disturbances with deep-learning reference
classifiers” (Electric Power Systems Research, 195, 2021)
[17] C. O’Donovan, C. Giannetti, & G. Todeschini “A novel deep learning power quality disturbance classification method using autoencoders” (Proceedings of the
320

13th International Conference on Agents and Artificial Intelligence (ICAART 2021), 2, 2021, pages 373-380)
[18] E. Styvaktakis, M. H. J. Bollen, & I. Y. H. Gu “Automatic classification of power system events using RMS voltage measurements” (IEEE Power Engineering
Proceeding e-Book

Society Summer Meeting, 2, 2002, pages 824-829)

[19] M. H. J. Bollen, I. Y. H. Gu, P. G. V. Axelberg, & E. Styvaktakis “Classification of underlying causes of power quality disturbances: Deterministic versus statistical
methods” (EURASIP J. Adv. Signal Process, 2007)
 4th
SEERC
Electric Transmission
Machines and Power Electronics
CONFERENCE
Oral Presentation: Classification of Power Quality Events in the Transmission Grid: Comparative Evaluation of
Different Machine Learning Models

[20] R. Sinvula, K. M. Abo-Al-Ez, & M. T. Kahn “Harmonic source detection methods: A systematic literature review” (IEEE Access, 7, 2019, pages 74283-74299)
[21] W. Wang, H. Yin, C. Chen, A. Till, W. Yao, X. Deng, & Y. Liu “Frequency disturbance event detection based on synchrophasors and deep learning” (IEEE
Transactions on Smart Grid, 11(4), 2020, pages 3593-3605)
[22] Y. Ma, X. Xiao, & Y. Wang “Identifying the root cause of power system disturbances based on waveform templates” (Electric Power Systems Research, 180,
2020)
[23] X. Jiang, B. Stephen, & S. McArthur “Automated distribution network fault cause identification with advanced similarity metrics” (IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, 36(2), 2021, pages 785-793)
[23] X. Jiang, B. Stephen, & S. McArthur “Automated distribution network fault cause identification with advanced similarity metrics” (IEEE Transactions on Power
Delivery, 36(2), 2021, pages 785-793)
[24] D. Küçük, S. Buhan, T. Demirci, M. B. Özkan, M. S. Çınar, E. Altıntaş, U. Güvengir, S. B. Çelik, S. Uçar, C. A. Mantaş, M. Yeniceli, N. Noyan, M. Yeşil, Ş. N. Güler,
İ. E. Kayaoğlu, U. Yener & K. Ç. Bayındır “TEKİS: TEİAŞ Electric Power Quality and Grid Monitoring System” (Power Systems Conference, 10, 2022)

321
Proceeding e-Book