Received 2 October 2023, accepted 17 November 2023, date of publication 20 November 2023,

date of current version 28 November 2023.

Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3335191

Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the

Buildings-to-Grid Integrated System Framework:
A Systematic Text-Mining-Assisted Literature
Review and Trend Analysis
A. BACHOUMIS 1, C. MYLONAS2 , K. PLAKAS 1, M. BIRBAS 1, AND A. BIRBAS 1
1 Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Patras, Rio Campus, 26504 Patras, Greece
2 Electrical and Computer Engineering, National Technical University of Athens, 15780 Zografou, Greece

Corresponding author: A. Bachoumis (abachoumis@ece.upatras.gr)

This work was supported in part by the European Union’s (EU) Horizon 2020 Projects under Grant 864537 (FEVER) and
Grant 958478 (ENERMAN).

ABSTRACT Data-driven machine learning-based methods have provided immense capabilities, revolution-
izing sectors like the Buildings-to-grid (B2G) integrated system. Since the penetration rate of distributed
energy resources increases towards a net-zero emissions power system, so does the need for advanced
services that ensure B2G-integrated system reliability. The convergence of advancements in machine
learning, computational resources at the entire cloud-edge continuum, and large datasets from sensing
devices enable the development of these data-driven energy analytics services. This work conducts a
systematic text-mining-based literature review to examine the diverse range and trends of machine learning
methods used to enhance reliability in B2G-integrated systems. While traditional manual sampling and
analysis approaches have limited the effectiveness of previous literature review papers in this field, this
systematic literature review work aims to synthesize and summarize the existing body of research more
efficiently and effectively. To achieve this, this study collected almost 10,500 papers from Scholar and Scopus
databases. It employed text-mining-assisted BERTopic-based topic modelling and statistical trend analysis
techniques to uncover semantic patterns and explore the temporal evolution of research themes. A two-
dimensional taxonomy was derived to analyze the technical papers from a business and machine learning-
related perspective. By quantifying the temporal trends within these topics, the study unveiled insights about
the state-of-the-art analytics that ensure reliability in the B2G-integrated system domain while proposing
future research directions.

INDEX TERMS Building-to-grid, data-driven, machine learning, systematic review, topic modeling, trend
analysis.

I. INTRODUCTION lower to higher voltage levels) to active (i.e., decentral-

To tackle climate change, directives around the globe boost
the electrification of sectors and the high penetration of
Distributed Energy Resources (DERs). The proliferation of
DERs at the edge of the distribution grids, such as rooftop
photovoltaics (PVs), Electric Vehicles (EVs), or battery
storage systems (BSSs), has transformed the grids from
passive (i.e., centralized with unidirectional power flow
The associate editor coordinating the review of this manuscript and
approving it for publication was R. K. Saket . schemes.
ized with bidirectional power flows). The advancements
in sensors, meters, and control systems have enabled the
real-time monitoring and control of energy consumption,
generation, and storage in buildings, thus creating the
Buildings-to-grid (B2G) integrated system paradigm [1];
an integrated distribution grid/microgrid with buildings that
enable bidirectional energy flow and their active participation
in managing energy supply and demand, while actively
participating in implicit and explicit Demand Response (DR)

2023 The Authors. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.
VOLUME 11, 2023 For more information, see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ 130763
 A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
FIGURE 1. Left: Histogram of the review papers per publication year, Right: Histogram of the review papers per amount of included references.
Grid reliability, i.e., the ability of the grid infrastructure
to consistently deliver electricity with minimal disruptions
or outages, is the primary operating principle of grid oper-
ators. However, the high-DER penetrated B2G-integrated
systems experience several operational issues that threaten
the security of the supply of active end-consumers. These
issues are: violation of thermal limits and line congestions,
bus overvoltages, frequent short-circuit faults, deterioration
of power quality due to harmonic emissions of power
electronic interfaces, unbalanced phases, and reverse flows
that lead to degradation of voltage control and protection
schemes [2]. Flexibility, i.e., the capability of both DERs and
flexible load assets to deliberately adjust their production and
consumption patterns after receiving a response signal from
grid operators or any other market-related actor, has been
introduced to overcome those issues. Grid operators procure
flexibility, mainly as a short-term reliability solution, through
bilateral contracts with consumers or liberalized flexibility
markets, with other parties acting as market operators and
intermediates in the flexibility procurement process.
To ensure reliability in the B2G-integrated system by
realizing flexibility procurement from the edge of the distri-
bution grids, the stakeholders in the flexibility procurement
pipeline, i.e., Distribution System Operators (DSOs), local
aggregators, building operators, retailers, and local markets
operators, should develop advanced services harvesting data
from the sub-metering sensing devices in buildings, as well
as the Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) of the grid.
In addition, the accelerated progress in Machine Learning
(ML) and especially in Deep Neural Networks (DNNs)
[3], acts as a catalyst for deploying data-driven energy
analytics services; model-free approaches that exploit the
enormous amount of data and computational resources
existing in heterogeneous devices at the entire cloud-edge
continuum (see [4] for a related architecture and application)
without relying on the physical models of the systems thus
surpassing limitations that model-driven techniques exhibit
(i.e., modelling complexity, computationally intensive, and
problem intractability).
130764
A. PREVIOUS REVIEW PAPERS
Many literature review papers have been published to capture
the research convergence between data-driven and energy-
related analytics services in the high-DER penetrated B2G-
integrated systems. Each review paper investigates that
convergence from a different perspective, such as data-driven
applications for smart grids, big data analytics in energy,
building-level analytics, demand-side management analytics,
analytics for grid operation, electricity market-based services,
EV charging, and DER scheduling. Regardless of the focus of
the main topic, all of them include aspects of the data-driven
ML energy services contributing to the reliability in the B2G-
integrated systems, thus being relevant to be considered in
our analysis. In total, 402 review papers were retrieved and
analyzed, with the oldest dated back to 2013. The left plot in
Fig. 1 illustrates the number of papers published each year
from 2013 onwards. From the beginning of 2022 until April
2023, an unprecedentedly large number of 182 review papers
were published. This is a strong indicator of the impact that
data-driven methods have on B2G-integrated systems and the
attention that the research community has paid. In addition,
we can consider that each review paper’s references are a
good indicator of the actual number of papers used for the
literature review process since, from those review papers,
only 2 used text-mining techniques for analyzing the papers
(only for word frequency analysis) [5], [6].
The right plot in Fig. 1 illustrates the histogram of
the review papers grouped by the number of refer-
ences (mean=142, median=128). Furthermore, besides the
author’s intuition about trends, no review paper proves the
trend’s existence statistically rigorously (significance or not).
We notice several limitations in the current review papers.
Firstly, they utilize research-wise limited papers, thus missing
out on valuable research. Secondly, they might be biased as
they mainly focus on specific subsets of the literature, leading
to a potential lack of diversity. Additionally, conducting a
thorough go-through-of-all-papers review process is time-
consuming, impeding the timely dissemination of knowledge.
As aforementioned, review papers often have limitations
VOLUME 11, 2023
A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
regarding the temporal trends analysis, as they may not
capture the evolving nature of research topics over time while
failing to provide a comprehensive overview of the field
and propose actionable outcomes. Lastly, the replicability
of review papers’ results can be challenging due to the
lack of transparency and a systematic approach in the
selection and analysis process. These limitations highlight
the need for more innovative and inclusive approaches to
literature reviews, addressing these concerns to ensure the
dissemination of comprehensive and unbiased knowledge
within academia.
B. RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND WORK CONTRIBUTION
By highlighting the limitations and gaps in the existing
literature review papers and aiming to create a roadmap for
future research activities, three (3) Research Questions (RQ)
are formulated as the foundations for this literature review
paper. Specifically:
RQ1: How can we conduct a transparent, reliable, faster,
and reproducible literature review? (section II-A & .B)
RQ2: Could we derive a taxonomy of the applications
and services while also considering different dimensions of
analysis? (section II-A.3)
RQ2.1 Which applications and services are used for
reliability in B2G-integrated distribution grids? (section III)
RQ2.2: Which are the state-of-the-art ML techniques for
data-driven analytics? (section IV)
RQ3: Are there any temporal trends in the research, and
could we predict the future research direction? (sections III,
IV, and V)
To thoroughly reply to the above RQ, this paper contributes
by:
• Defining an in-depth quantifiable text-mining-assisted
methodology for conducting a systematic literature
review (RQ1),
• Conducting topic modelling analysis based on BERTopic
[7] topic modelling approach. It leverages semantic
embeddings to create more meaningful and coherent
topics to assist in the construction of the proposed
taxonomy (RQ1),
• Enhancing research reproducibility and transparency
in academia by providing the source code, in [8],
for the proposed methodology and the bibliographic
database used in the review. Sharing the source code
enables replication and verification of results, fostering
a culture of transparency and facilitating collaborations.
Providing access to the bibliographic database empow-
ers researchers to leverage the comprehensive dataset,
saving time and effort in future investigations (RQ1).
• Proposing taxonomy of data-driven energy analytics
services for reliability in the B2G-integrated system
domain based on two dimensions: (i) the business-
related, where the analytics are classified based on their
business objectives (RQ2.1), and (ii) the ML-related,
VOLUME 11, 2023
where each analytics service is examined based on the
used ML methods (RQ2.2),
• Employing Mann-Kendall Test [9] for nonparametric
trend analysis to extract statistically significant trends
and provide quantifiable analysis of the state-of-the-art
techniques in the domain (RQ3).
C. PAPER OUTLINE
The paper is structured as follows: Section I describes
the need for a systematic literature review in the B2G-
integrated system domain, leading to detailed research
questions and work contributions. Section II will thoroughly
present the text-mining-assisted methodology followed for
the systematic literature review. Section III will derive
a two-dimensional taxonomy for analyzing the technical
papers. Section IV will present the results for the business-
related dimension. Section V will introduce the results
regarding the ML-based dimension for the B2G-integrated
system analytics services. Finally, section V will summarize
the main findings of this work and propose future research
directions based on the conducted analysis.
II. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW APPROACH
This section includes the methodological approach for the
systematic literature review process and the text-mining
technical tool used for topic modelling.
A. METHODOLOGY
As depicted in Fig. 2, the systematic literature review follows
five distinct steps:
1) CORPUS CREATION
Two databases were used for corpus creation: Google Scholar
and Scopus. We retrieved abstracts, titles, DOIs, publishers,
journals’ names, and the year of publication from journals,
conferences, books, and review papers. Many combinations
were examined for both databases to understand their search-
ing sensitivity to mining the correct papers. Based on this
empirical process and by screening the papers retrieved, the
following combinations in their titles, keywords, or abstracts,
depending on the sensitivity of each database, are used: For
Google Scholar: We conduct six different search rounds
to digest the maximum amount of related papers using
different combinations of keywords. Specifically: a) (‘behind
the meter’ AND ‘demand side management’ AND ‘machine
learning’, b) ‘machine learning’ AND ‘distribution grids’,
c) ‘energy flexibility’ AND ‘machine learning’, d) ‘review’
AND ‘data driven’ AND ‘distribution grids’, e) ‘optimal
power flow’ AND ‘machine learning’, f) ‘machine learning
for distribution electricity grids’. For Scopus: We conduct
an integrated search to digest the maximum amount of
related papers using the following combination of keywords:
’({machine learning} OR {deep learning} OR {federated
learning} OR {data-driven} OR {reinforcement learning}
OR {end-to-end learning} OR {supervised learning} OR
{unsupervised learning} OR {learning-based} OR {neural
130765
 A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
FIGURE 2. The methodology for conducting a systematic literature review and the technical details of the BERTopic topic modelling approach.
networks})’ AND ’({distribution grids} OR {distributed
energy resources} OR {energy management system} OR
{energy flexibility of buildings} OR {flexible buildings} OR
{energy flexibility} OR {buildings flexibility} OR {flexi-
bility markets} OR {multi-energy systems} OR {integrated
energy system} OR {demand response} OR {demand side
management} OR {demand-side management} OR {local
energy} OR {energy communities} OR {load management}
OR {distribution system} OR {smart buildings} OR {local
energy market} OR {smart meter} OR {power flow})’ AND
NOT ’({water} OR {powertrain})’, where ‘AND’, ‘OR’, and
‘AND NOT’ operators are used similarly to the Boolean logic.
In total, 10,528 papers were retrieved, from which 10,126
were technical papers (6,624 were journal papers) and
402 were review papers (Fig. 3). Two different corpora
are created from the extracted abstracts: the literature
review papers corpus and the technical papers corpus.
Each corpus is preprocessed to be ready for use by the
topic modelling approach (see subsection II-B). Specifically,
stopword removal, word tokenization, and lemmatization
activities take place.
2) TOPICS EXTRACTION & INTERPRETATION
This step conducts topic modelling to extract meaningful,
semantically coherent latent topics. Both the literature review
and technical papers corpora are ingested into the text-mining
topic modelling method (see subsection II-B). Human experts
interpret the results for both corpora, thus giving labels to the
different lists of key latent factors (see appendix for indicative
examples). For the literature review papers corpus, R0-topics
are generated, which mainly illustrate the high-level business
areas that the literature review papers deal with. T0-topics
are generated for the technical papers corpus, unveiling topics
regarding research areas and techniques employed. To further
investigate intrinsic trends for each T0-topic, the technical
papers’ abstract corpus can be split into subgroups, each with
abstracts with the same dominant T0-topic. At each subgroup,
topic modelling can also be conducted, hereafter called T1-
130766
topics, unveiling secret patterns that could not be seen in T0-
topics.
FIGURE 3. Type and percentage of retrieved papers used in the analysis.
3) TAXONOMY CREATION
By digesting the information created in the previous step
(list of R0-, T0-, and T1-topics), human experts derive a
taxonomy to provide a systematic framework for categorizing
and organizing the analytics services for reliability in B2G-
integrated systems. It helps researchers create a hierarchical
structure that classifies papers based on relevant attributes on
the topics of data-driven energy analytics regarding reliability
in B2G-integrated systems. Significant trends and gaps in the
research topics of interest are identified by employing the
taxonomy.
We consider two distinct taxonomy dimensions in our
analysis. The first concerns the business objectives and the
functionalities of B2G-related analytics. For that reason,
we employ the two upper levels of the Smart Grid Archi-
tecture Model (SGAM) [10], i.e., business and function
layers (application and service layers in Fig. 4). SGAM is
a conceptual framework that provides a structured repre-
sentation of the smart grid’s various components, domains,
and interactions. It enables stakeholders to understand and
analyze the architecture of a smart grid deployment, including
the integration of different functionalities, communication
VOLUME 11, 2023
A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework

protocols, and technology layers. The business layer rep- 5) TREND ANALYSIS
resents the business view on the information, while the We detect the temporal patterns in research trends using
function one describes system use cases, functions and statistical trend analysis for the categories of interest
services, including their relationships from an architectural defined in the two-dimensional taxonomy. Particularly, the
viewpoint. We define three zones (vertical axis in Fig. 4), Mann-Kendall Trend Test is used to determine whether or
i.e., market, enterprise, and operation, and three domains not a trend exists in the timeseries data of the selected latent
(horizontal axis in Fig. 4), i.e., distribution grid, front-of-the- topic. It is a rank nonparametric test, meaning there is no
meter (FTM) DERs, and buildings. The zones and domains underlying assumption about the data normality [9], [13].
categorize the analytics based on the concept of functional In this test, the null (H0 ) and alternative hypotheses (H1 )
separation (in which area of operation the services refer are equal to the non-existence and existence of a trend in
to) and the physically related areas to the electrical grid, the timeseries of the observational data, respectively. The
respectively. equations for computing the Mann-Kendall statistics S and
The second dimension analyzes each energy analytics the standardized test statistic ZMK are given by the following
service from an ML standpoint. We analyze those services equations:
based on the following: (i) type of analytics: ‘‘What n−1 X
n
happened’’, ‘‘What will happen’’, and ‘‘How to handle
X
S= sign(Xj − Xi ) (1)
it’’ are respectively the questions answered by descriptive, i=1 j=i+1
predictive, and prescriptive analytics, (ii) ML area and 
algorithms: the area of ML, such as supervised learning,  +1, if
 (Xj − Xi ) > 0
transfer, and reinforcement learning & control, and the type of sign(Xj − Xi ) = 0, if (Xj − Xi ) = 0 (2)
(Xj − Xi ) < 0

ML algorithm used for each analytics services, such as Deep 
−1, if
learning (DL), regression models etc., and (iii) algorithm Var(S) = 1/18[n(n − 1)(2n + 5)
execution place: the place where training and inference q
take place in the cloud-edge continuum, as classified in −
X
tp (tp − 1)(2tp + 5)] (3)
six and one levels by [11]; Level 0 - cloud intelligence, p
Level 1-cloud–edge co-inference and cloud training, Level 
S −1
2-in-edge co-inference and cloud training, Level 3-on-device 
 √ , if S < 0
 Var(S)


inference and cloud training, Level 4-cloud–edge co-training
ZMK = 0, if S = 0 (4)
and inference, Level 5-all in-edge, and Level 6-all on-device.  S − 1
, if S > 0

Levels 0 to 3 indicate that the training takes place on the √


cloud, while in the rest, the training is also present on Var(S)
the edge. where Xi and Xj are the aggregated number of papers in
two sequential years i and j, n is the length of timeseries;
tp is a number of ties for the pth value, and q are the
4) PROPERTIES FOR TAXONOMY EVALUATION
tied values. The positive values of ZMK indicate increasing
We employ the method defined in [12] to evaluate the derived
trends, and negative ZMK indicate decreasing trends in a
taxonomy. It defines a three-step approach to assessing
particular timeseries. Given a confidence level α, for |ZMK | >
the quality of the taxonomy based on structure suitability,
Z1−α/2 , the null hypothesis is rejected, and there exists a
applicability, and purpose. Specifically:
significant trend. Z1−α/2 is the critical Z values from the
• Structure suitability consists of three elements: (i) standard normal distribution table. Our analysis uses a 95%
Generality measures a taxonomy’s generality, i.e., how confidence interval where Z1−0.05/2 equals 1.96. We conduct
much the taxonomy is general and specific at the the Mann-Kendall trend test by using the functionalities of
same time, (ii) Appropriateness is measured by the the pyMannKendall python library [14].
taxonomy’s soundness (covers the papers correctly) and
completeness (covers the maximum amount of papers B. TOPIC MODELLING - BERTOPIC
existing in the corpus), and (iii) Orthogonality, i.e., Two approaches were tested for the topic modelling process
no overlapping between any two classes in taxonomy. to find the most suitable one: Latent Dirichlet Allocation
• Applicability is determined by its reliability (consis- (LDA) and Bidirectional Encoder Representations from
tency of results), correctness of results, and ease of use Transformers (BERTopic). The former is a three-level
for the end-users. hierarchical Bayesian model in which each collection item is
• Purpose is determined by the taxonomy’s relevance modelled as a finite mixture over an underlying set of topics.
(whether its classes and categories provide a value for It requires more preprocessing, with the number of topics
the taxonomy’s purpose), novelty (whether it offers to be known beforehand, using bag-of-words disregarding
added value compared to existing taxonomies), and semantics while considering that each document is composed
significance (taxonomy to be more significant than of a mixture of topics [15]. On the other side, the latter utilizes
others existing in the literature). BERT semantic embeddings to extract and cluster topics

VOLUME 11, 2023 130767

 A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
from a corpus of text by automatically finding the number
of topics without requiring exhaustive pre-processing and
assigning each document to solely one topic [7]. Considering
those characteristics and the authors’ experimentally-gained
knowledge that the BERTopic-generated latent topics had
a more coherent representation, BERTopic was selected for
the topic modelling process. The steps followed for the
BERTopic modelling are:
1) EMBEDDINGS
BERT embeddings are generated for each document in
the corpus using a pre-trained BERT model. BERT is a
transformer-based neural network architecture that captures
contextualized word representations. We utilized the ‘‘all-
mpnet-base-v2’’ [16]; a sentence-transformers model that
maps sentences and paragraphs onto a 768-dimensional dense
vector space.
2) DIMENSIONALITY REDUCTION
To reduce the dimensionality of the BERT embeddings,
BERTopic applies Uniform Manifold Approximation and
Projection (UMAP) initialized with rescaled Principal
Components Analysis (PCA) embeddings. UMAP reduces
the high-dimensional embeddings into a lower-dimensional
space while preserving the underlying structure and relation-
ships [17].
3) CLUSTERING
It is employed in the BERTopic topic model process to group
similar documents based on their semantic similarity. K-
means algorithm is applied [18], dictating the amount of
desired clusters by forcing every single point to be in a cluster.
We prefer K-means to HDBSCAN [19] to avoid outliers.
4) TOPIC REPRESENTATION
Each topic is represented by a set of key latent fac-
tors (keywords), which are the most representative words
within that topic. These keywords are determined based
on the words with the highest c-TF-IDF (class-based Term
Frequency-Inverse Document Frequency) scores within the
topic. c-TF-IDF is a variant of TF-IDF that considers the class
information of documents as such:
W (x, c) = tfx,c · log(1 + Afx )
where tfx,c is the frequency of word x in class c, fx is the
frequency of word x across all classes, and A is the average
number of words per class. Then, we calculate the Maximal
Marginal Relevance (MMR) between candidate keywords
and the document [20]; it considers the cosine similarity of
keywords with the document and the similarity of already
selected keywords. This results in a selection of keywords that
maximize their diversity concerning the document.
5) EVALUATION METRICS
To select the optimal number of latent topics, different
evaluation metrics are used for the assessment. On the
130768
one side, topic coherence metrics measure the score of a
single topic by measuring the degree of semantic similarity
between high-scoring words in the topic, while evaluating
topic modelling interpretability. Cuci measure is based on a
sliding window and the point-wise mutual information (PMI)
of all word pairs of the given top words [21]. The topic
coherence measure takes the set of N top words of a topic
and sums a confirmation measure over all the word pairs.
Probabilities P are estimated based on word co-occurrence
counts in the different topics w. Cuci coherence is calculated
by:
N −1 X
N
2 X
Cuci = PMI (wi , wj ) (6)
N (N − 1)
i=1 j=i+1
P(wi , wj ) + ϵ
PMI (wi , wj ) = log (7)
P(wi )P(wj )
where ϵ is added to avoid a logarithm of zero. [22] proposed
an asymmetrical confirmation measure between top word
pairs (smoothed conditions probability). The summation of
CUMass coherence accounts for the ordering among the top
words of a topic, as such:
N i−1
2 XX P(wi , wj ) + ϵ
CUMass = log (8)
N (N − 1) P(wj )
i=2 j=1
For both metrics, higher values dictate more interpretable and
coherent topics. Conversely, similarity metrics measure the
similarity or overlap between different topics. Cosine similar-
ity is a metric that assesses the similarity between topics by
comparing the angles between their word distribution vectors.
A higher cosine similarity value indicates a higher degree of
similarity or overlap between the topics [23]. The equation
that calculates the cosine similarity of two topic word vectors
wi and wj is:
wi wTj
k(wi , wj ) = (9)
||wi || ||wj ||
which is called cosine similarity because Euclidean (L2)
normalization projects the vectors onto the unit sphere, and
their dot product is then the cosine of the angle between the
points denoted by the vectors. The optimal sizing of the topics
is a trade-off between the model’s coherence, in-between
(5)
topics similarity, and computational resources.
III. BUSINESS-RELATED DIMENSION
To fill up with content the first dimension of the taxonomy,
we conduct BERTopic-based topic generation in both the
literature and technical corpora. After several experiments,
we conclude that 20 R0-topics are adequate to provide
coherent topics (CUCI : −10.22, CUMass : −0.942) with low
in-between topics similarity (Fig. 5). Table 3 in the Appendix
presents the BERtopic-generated 20 R0-topics and their
labels as human experts interpret them. Regarding the T0-
topics, we conducted several experiments. Fig. 6 illustrates
the coherence metrics results for several experiments. As can
VOLUME 11, 2023
A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
FIGURE 4. Taxonomy dimension that classifies the analytic application and services from a business-related perspective.
FIGURE 5. Metrics regarding the BERTopic-generated 20 R0-topics. Left:
In-between topics similarity matrix, Right: Distance map of topics based
on cosine similarity projected onto 2-dimensional space.
be seen, there is no significant reduction in the CUCI metric
after the number of topics surpasses 12 (with a slight increase
after 52). In addition, the CUMass steadily reduces as long
as the number of topics increases. Considering these metrics
and consulting the produced similarity matrices for each
experiment, we conclude that a size of T0-topics equal to
52 is adequate for our analysis. From those 52 T0-topics,
we reduce their number from 52 to 40 (results included in
Table 4 of Appendix) by excluding those irrelevant in the
context and merging those with a similarity index higher
than 80% (as can be seen in the left plot of Fig. 7). The
generated topics are leveraged to disclose the hidden semantic
structure of the technical papers. They are inserted into
the different layers of the first dimension based on the
conceptual interpretation by human experts. Fig. 4 presents
VOLUME 11, 2023
FIGURE 6. Coherence metrics for several experiments for the
BERTopic-generated T0-topics: CUCI (upper) and CUMass (lower).
the classification of applications and services based on
the SGAM architecture. Those services are grouped into
six business-level applications: optimal trading, building
management, planning and stability analysis, protection, dis-
tribution/microgrid operation, and Local Energy Community
(LEC)/Virtual Power Plant (VPP) operation. Each service
may belong to more than one application, as the multiple
colours show in each service. To further decompose the ser-
vices and extract more semantics from the technical corpus,
we conduct the T1-topic modelling (the results are excluded
due to size limitations). Fig. 8 and 9 contain the detailed
taxonomy of the services as well as their decomposition
and indicative references. The below taxonomy is a result
130769
 A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
FIGURE 7. Metrics regarding the BERTopic-generated 52 T0-topics. Left:
In-between topics similarity matrix, Right: Distance map of topics based
on cosine similarity projected onto 2-dimensional space.
that emerged through many iterations between the experts
to derive a high-quality outcome. It contains 14 categories
with 55 classes (leaves), trying to have an adequate level of
generality, soundness, and completeness without at the same
time increasing the taxonomy’s complexity at an untractable
level. Orthogonality was a main priority for the taxonomy’s
derivation, meaning that no overlapping exists between any
two classes. Regarding applicability, the taxonomy offers
high reliability and correctness, and it is quite easy to use by
end-users due to its high interpretability and explainability.
In addition, the categories and classes were derived to have
the maximum coherence, as well as novelty and significance
compared to existing taxonomies presented in previous
works, such as in [3], grasping more aspects while also
focusing more thoroughly on the analytics services in the
B2G integrated system domain. Specifically, these services
are:
• Load visibility: Data-driven methods that provide
analytics offering better visibility to aggregators and
DSOs about load. We decompose those methods into:
(i) Non-intrusive load monitoring (NILM) of BTM
electricity-consuming appliances not equipped with sub-
metering BTM devices. We further categorize the NILM
services into two categories based on the resolution
of the input data: low-frequency (< 2kHz) [24], [25],
[26], [27] and high-frequency (≥ 2kHz) [28], [29], [30],
[31], (ii) Load profiling by clustering the customers
into clusters regarding their consumption patterns [32],
[33], [34], [35], (iii) Load modelling and synthetic data
generation methods for further analytical studies [36],
[37], [38], [39], (iv) DER generation estimation to unveil
net load consumption in households and distribution
feeders [40], [41], [42], [43].
• Fault prevention, diagnosis and protection: Data-driven
services that prevent, diagnose, and protect the distri-
bution grids from faults, exceeding the limitations of
the model-driven methods [247]. The services regarding
fault prevention are divided into predictive maintenance
[60], [61], [62], [63] and proactive resilient scheduling
[64], [65], [66], [67] methods. The fault diagnosis
services are decomposed into arc fault [44], [45],
130770
[46], [47], short-circuits [52], [53], [54], [55], and
power quality disturbances [56], [57], [58], [59] meth-
ods. Finally, post-fault data-driven protection methods
[48], [49], [50], [51] are also classified under this
service.
• Non-technical losses: Data-driven methods dealing with
electricity losses caused by reasons other than technical
factors. We decompose those methods into remote
meter reading (i.e., vision techniques to reduce errors
in the meter reading process), automatic calibration
to decrease meter errors, and health index estimation
methods [68], [69], [70], [71]. In addition, data-driven
methods that detect data abnormalities (i.e., missing
values imputation, outliers detection) [72], [73], [74],
[75], as well as meter-tampering detection methods [76],
[77], [78], [79].
• Restoration: The process of returning power to buildings
after a power outage or disruption in the distribution
grid/microgrid. The data-driven methods across the
literature are decomposed into grid reconfiguration [80],
[81], [82], [83], self-healing plan methods [84], [85],
[86], [87], and methods for islanding detection [88],
[89], [90], [91].
• Energy and flexibility trading: Data-driven techniques
that optimize energy and flexibility trading in the
DER-connected assets and loads. These services are
categorized based on the assets and goal of trading
into Peer-to-peer (P2P) (decentralized trading between
peers) [92], [93], [94], [95], demand-side (trading
considering only BTM assets) [96], [97], [98], [99],
and VPP trading (trading including both DERs and
flexible loads) [100], [101], [102], [103]. In addition,
we also include the baseline estimation methods;
data-driven methods that estimate a baseline level of
energy consumption for a building/asset/community
before offering demand-response/flexibility services
[43], [104], [105], [106], thus enabling accurate billing.
• Forecasting: Predicting several variables in the B2G-
integrated systems domain in different time-frames
serving as an input for most of the other services.
We decompose the forecasting service into consumption
(i.e., appliances [107], [108], [109], [110], buildings
[111], [112], [113], [114], and net-load [115], [116],
[117], [118]), price [119], [120], [121], [122], and local
production either through forecasting variables (i.e.,
irradiance [123], [124], [125], [126] or wind speed
[127], [128], [129], [130]) or directly the power (i.e.,
wind [135], [136], [137], [138] and PV [131], [132],
[133], [134]).
• Storage and EV analytics: Data-driven methods that
assist decision-making processes regarding energy stor-
age and EV battery charging/discharging. We categorize
the identified services into EV scheduling [139], [140],
[141], [142], Energy storage scheduling [143], [144],
[145], [146], and data-driven battery physics modelling
[147], [148], [149], [150].
VOLUME 11, 2023
A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework

FIGURE 8. Further decomposition of analytics services (I). Four indicative references are given for each analytics category.

VOLUME 11, 2023 130771

 A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework

FIGURE 9. Further decomposition of analytics services (II). Four indicative references are given for each analytics category.

• Grid planning: Data-driven activities that ensure the
efficient and reliable planning of the grid. We decom-
pose the literature into three distinct data-driven ser-
vices: technical losses estimation [151], [152], [153],
[154], ML-based probabilistic planning [155], [156],
[157], [158] and reliability assessment [159], [160],
[161], [162].
• Cybersecurity: Data-driven methods that provide a
shield to the IT systems of the digitalized B2G-
integrated system. We cluster the services based on the
CIA triad; Confidentiality (prevent sensitive information
from unauthorized access attempts) [163], [164], [165],
[166], Availability (information consistency and acces-
sibility for authorized parties) [167], [168], [169], [170],
and Integrity (consistency, accuracy and trustworthiness
of data over its entire lifecycle [171], [172], [173],
[174]).
• Stability analysis: Data-driven methods that assess the
ability of the distribution grid to maintain steady-state
operation under various operating conditions. We split
the literature into three services: voltage stability under
various operating conditions [175], [176], [177], [178],
security and cascading failure assessment under fault
conditions [179], [180], [181], [182], and stability under
transient conditions [183], [184], [185], [186].
• Building-level event detection: Data-driven methods to
detect and identify significant events or anomalies in
the energy consumption patterns of individual buildings.

130772 VOLUME 11, 2023

A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
These methods are classified into occupancy & activity
detection methods [187], [188], [189], [190] and fault
diagnosis in appliances [191], [192], [193], [194] to act
proactively and fast to failures.
• Optimal power flow (OPF): Data-driven methods to
determine the most efficient and cost-effective way
to orchestrate DERs, while satisfying various opera-
tional constraints, such as DER capability, distribution
lines thermal limits, voltage limits, and line losses.
We decompose these methods into two categories: (i)
end-to-end learning methods that replace the optimiza-
tion methods mapping input data directly to decisions
[195], [196], [197], [198] and (ii) learning-augmented
methods that act supplementary to the classical opti-
mization methods boosting performance (mainly in
terms of execution time) [199], [200], [201], [202].
• Energy management & control: Data-driven methods
that directly manage and control DER, grid assets, and
BTM appliances to manage local energy production
and provide flexibility services to the grid. We divide
those services into the following categories: demand-
side management (i.e., heating/cooling loads control
[203], [204], [205], [206], demand response [207],
[208], [209], [210]), building-level energy management
[211], [212], [213], [214], community-level energy
management [215], [216], [217], [218], microgrid
control [219], [220], [221], [222], load frequency control
services [223], [224], [225], [226], and voltage control
services [227], [228], [229], [230] through reactive
power management.
• Grid variables estimation: Data-driven methods that
leverage the deployment of AMI to calculate grid
variables/parameters in conditions of partial or no
awareness of grid topology-related information without
using model-based techniques. In the literature, four
distinct services are identified: phase estimation (iden-
tify the phase of grid-connected loads) [231], [232],
[233], [234], topology and lines parameters estimation
(estimate grid parameters when missing) [235], [236],
[237], [238], state estimation of the partial observable
grid (estimation of branch currents and bus voltages)
[239], [240], [241], [242], and calculation of voltages
(where no information about grid topology exists) [243],
[244], [245], [246].
We conducted the Mann-Kendall statistical test to examine
the trend for each analytics service. As shown in the second
column of Table 1, each service is related to one or more
T0-topics. Fig. 10 illustrates the distribution over time of the
technical papers per T0-topic. In the analysis, we considered
only the papers published up to 2022 (the last fully considered
year), with a start date of 2000. The results show that all
the services have a statistically significant increasing trend
in the literature (p-values ≤ 0.05 for a 95% confidence
interval). The Z-score captures the overall magnitude of the
departure from the null hypothesis, while the slope represents
VOLUME 11, 2023
the trend’s rate of change (steepness). A time series can
have a high Z-score but a relatively moderate slope, if the
departure from the null hypothesis is large in magnitude
but occurs gradually over time. Outliers, trend direction,
and sample variability can explain the discrepancies between
Z-score and slope values. Therefore, we extract conclusions
about the growth of increasing services trend using the slope
values as an indicator. The most dominant ascending trends
(↑∗ ) exist in Forecasting (slope = 5.4), Energy management
& control (slope = 4.25), Fault prevention, diagnosis, and
protection (slope = 3), and Storage and EV analytics (slope =
2.58) services. The least increasing trends are observed, even
though they are still significant, in Restoration (slope = 0.57),
OPF (slope = 0.31), and Non-technical losses (slope = 0.2)
services.
Table 2 presents the average number of citations (showing
the impact of the papers on the community) and the
mean impact factor of the journals (showing the journal’s
importance and impact on the community) per analytics
service category. Forecasting service has the maximum mean
citation number (14.43), followed by Energy and flexibility
trading (12.87) and Load visibility (12.15). Regarding the
mean impact factor, the Energy and flexibility trading
analytics service contains papers published in journals with
the highest impact factor (7.59), with the majority being
published in IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid.
FIGURE 10. Amount of technical papers per T0-topic published between
2010 and 2023. All the articles published before 2010 are aggregated to
that year. For 2023, we included articles published up to the first quarter.
IV. ML-RELATED DIMENSION
The second taxonomy dimension analyzes each analytics
service from an ML standpoint. Table 3 presents the results
of that analysis. A list of categories regarding the ML area
and algorithms has been defined to facilitate the investigation
of trends in each service. Regarding the quality of the
derived taxonomy, the main priority was to achieve a high
level of generality, appropriateness, and applicability. On the
other side, the ML categories defined were not mutually
exclusive, i.e., some algorithms can fall into multiple
categories depending on their usage or variations, meaning
that overlapping among the classes existed, thus a low degree
of orthogonality. The main novelty was observed in the
presentation of the algorithm’s execution level since it is the
first time, to the authors’ knowledge, that a taxonomy
130773
130774
TABLE 1. Mann-Kendall statistical test results for trend analysis of the identified services. Related topics ID refers to the T0-topics that are semantically linked to the respective service, Trend denotes the
trend (increasing, decreasing or no trend), p is the p-value of the significance test, Z is normalized test statistics, Tau is the Kendall Tau, s is Mann Kendal’s score, vars is Variance S, slope is the Theil-Sen
estimator/slope, and intercept is the intercept of Kendall-Theil Robust Line.

VOLUME 11, 2023

A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
of analytics services in the energy domain includes that
information.
The ML areas and algorithms upon which the analysis is
conducted are:
• Supervised Learning (SL): The algorithm is trained
using labelled data, where input samples are paired with
their corresponding target labels. The model learns to
make predictions or classify new unseen data based on
the patterns and relationships learned during training.
SL has the highest increasing utilization trend in Fault
prevention, diagnosis, and protection service (slope =
2.25), followed by Load visibility and Energy man-
agement & control services (slope = 1.67). Regarding
the used algorithms, Feedforward Neural Networks are
the most employed ones, and Support Vector Machine
(SVM) demonstrates the highest increasing rate of
change (slope = 2) among the methods.
• Unsupervised Learning (UL): The algorithms work with
unlabeled data, aiming to discover underlying patterns,
structures, or relationships within the data. It involves
techniques such as clustering, dimensionality reduction,
and anomaly detection to extract meaningful insights
and discover hidden patterns without explicit target
labels. Forecasting (slope = 0.83) and Load visibility
(slope = 0.7) services showcase the most remarkable
ascending trend in the literature.
• Semi-supervised Learning (SSL): A combination of the
SL and UL, where the algorithm is trained on a mixture
of labelled and unlabeled data. It leverages the limited
labelled and unlabeled data to improve learning accuracy
and generalization in cases where labelled data is scarce
or expensive. SSL is not widely used in B2G-integrated
system analytics services, with a slightly increasing
trend detected only in Load visibility service (slope
0.05).
• Reinforcement Learning (RL): Training agents make
sequential decisions in an environment to maximize
cumulative rewards, where the agent learns through trial
and error by interacting with the environment and receiv-
ing feedback through rewards or penalties. The most
used algorithms are Deep Q-learning, deep deterministic
policy gradient, actor-critic, proximal policy optimiza-
tion, policy gradient, and Monte Carlo tree search. All
employed RL categories, i.e., value-based, policy-based,
and actor-critic-based, have a statistically significant
increasing trend, regardless of the service category, with
value-based RL being used more frequently and demon-
strating the greatest ascending trend (slope=0.67), fol-
lowed by actor-critic-based RL (slope= 0.5). Regarding
the utilization of RL in analytics services, the greatest
ascending trend is observed in Energy and Management
& Control (slope=1.33), Storage and EV (slope = 0.5),
and Energy and flexibility trading services (slope = 0.5).
• Active learning (AL): It attempts to maximize a model’s
performance gain while annotating the fewest samples
VOLUME 11, 2023
possible. The algorithm actively seeks input from the
user to improve the learning process and reduce the
annotation effort required by selecting the most relevant
data points to label. AL is mostly used in Building-level
event detection services; however, the trend’s rate of
change is equal to 0.
• Transfer Learning (TL): It involves utilizing knowledge
learned from one domain or task and applying it to
another related domain or task. The pre-trained model’s
knowledge is transferred or fine-tuned to the new
task, saving computation resources and training time,
especially when the new task has limited labelled data.
TL has a statistically significant uptrend in the B2G-
integrated system analytics service ecosystem with zero
slopes in Load visibility, Forecasting, and Building-level
event detection.
• Explainable Learning (EX): It refers to developing
AI algorithms and systems prioritizing explainability,
interpretability, and transparency principles. It aims to
build reliable and accountable AI systems that can be
trusted by users and stakeholders, taking into account
ethical considerations and societal impact. EX has been
used in the last years mainly in Forecasting analytics
services (↑∗ , slope = 0).
• Deep Learning methods (DL): Algorithms that are
based on Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs), such
as Multilayer perceptrons or Feedforward Neural Net-
works (↑∗ , slope = 0.87), Recurrent Neural Networks
(RNN) (↑∗ , slope = 0.5), including Long Short-Term
Memory (LSTM) and Gated Recurrent Units (GRUs),
Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN) (↑∗ , slope =
0), Autoencoders (↑∗ , slope = 0.2), Graph neural
networks (↑∗ , slope = 0), attention-based transformers
(↑∗ , slope = 0.45), and deep RL algorithms (e.g.,
deep deterministic policy gradient) (↑∗ , slope = 0).
Regarding the utilization of DL in services, Forecasting
has the highest increasing trend (slope = 3.5), Fault
prevention, diagnosis and protection (slope = 2.22), and
Energy Management & control (slope = 1.7).
• Signal Processing (SP): Methods commonly used in the
ML pipeline preprocessing stage. It involves manipulat-
ing, analyzing, and extracting useful information from
signals or data. Techniques like wavelet transformation,
filtering, and feature extraction are applied to enhance
the quality and relevance of data for subsequent learning
algorithms. SP methods utilization has the greatest
ascending trend in Fault prevention, diagnosis and
protection (slope = 0.687), Forecasting (slope = 0.29),
and Load visibility (slope = 0.21) analytics services.
• Tree-based methods (TR): Tree-based methods involve
decision trees and ensemble methods such as random
forests and gradient boosting. These methods use
a hierarchical structure of decision rules to make
predictions or classifications. TR methods are employed
mainly in Forecasting (↑∗ , slope= 0.17) and Fault
prevention, diagnosis and protection services (↑∗ ,
130775
 A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
TABLE 2. Average number of citations and impact factor for journal publications per analytics service.
slope = 0.1). Random forest exhibits the highest
ascending trend (slope = 0.44), regardless of the
analytics service category.
• Clustering methods (CL): Techniques like k-means,
hierarchical, and density-based clustering identify
clusters or subgroups within datasets without prior
knowledge of the class labels. Their utilization is mainly
observed in the Forecasting service, demonstrating an
ascending trend with a slightly increased rate of change
(slope = 0.06).
• Ensemble learning methods (EN): It combines multiple
individual models to make predictions or classifica-
tions, often resulting in improved performance and
generalization (↑∗ , slope = 0.25). Techniques such
as bagging (e.g., Random Forest), boosting (e.g.,
AdaBoost, Gradient Boosting), and stacking are used
to aggregate the predictions of multiple models and
leverage their collective knowledge.
• Bayesian-based methods (BY): Methods using Bayesian
principles to make inferences and predictions, such
as Bayesian networks and Gaussian processes. These
methods are mainly applied in Forecasting (slope =
0.29) and Load visibility services.
• Federated Learning (FL): The area of ML where decen-
tralized training is conducted; a global shared model is
trained using decentralized data sources on edge nodes
while preserving data privacy. The most commonly used
method is Federated Averaging (FedAvg) [248]. Using
FL in services is an important indicator defining the
algorithm execution level, where training is executed in
edge devices. FL has a statistically significant upward
trend, especially in Cybersecurity (slope = 0.4) and
Forecasting (slope = 0.2) analytics services.
Summing up, the analysis revealed increasing trends in SL
utilization for fault prevention, diagnosis, and protection
services, with feedforward neural networks being the most
130776
employed algorithm and SVM showing a high rate of change.
UL exhibited ascending trends in forecasting, Load visibility,
and load profiling services, while SSL had a slight upward
trend in Load visibility. At the same time, value-based and
actor-critic-based RL categories demonstrated the greatest
ascending trends across various service domains, with the
Energy and management service leading the way. AL is
predominantly used in Building-level event detection ser-
vices, while TL exhibits an upward trend in B2G-integrated
system analytics services. DL methods encompassing various
neural network architectures showcased increasing trends in
Forecasting, Fault prevention, diagnosis and protection, and
Energy management & control services. SP methods are
leveraged in the preprocessing stage of the ML pipeline and
exhibit ascending trends in Fault prevention, diagnosis, and
protection, as well as Forecasting and Load visibility services.
Tree-based methods are employed mainly in Forecasting and
Fault prevention, diagnosis, and protection services, with the
random forest exhibiting the highest increasing utilization
trend. Finally, FL, which focuses on decentralized training
and data privacy preservation, demonstrated upward trends
in Cybersecurity and Forecasting analytics services.
V. FUTURE DIRECTION AND CONCLUSION
In our two-dimensional taxonomy proposal of the data-driven
services for reliability in the B2G system, a broad spectrum
of research areas, methodologies, and practical applications
used all over the industry are presented. This method-
ologically rigorous taxonomy has significant implications
for real-world scenarios in research and industry. From
a research standpoint, the comprehensive framework can
guide researchers toward novel areas of study while also
highlighting gaps that the community can delve into. The
text-mining-based approach can provide a methodological
framework for researchers to investigate other areas of
interest by harvesting emerging topics in the literature.
Moreover, other researchers can utilize the taxonomy to
VOLUME 11, 2023
A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework

TABLE 3. ML dimension results. {N [↑∗ /→, slope]} denotes the number of papers, a statistically significant increasing trend (p-value ≤0.05)/no-trend
present, and the slope value in case of trend existence, respectively.

VOLUME 11, 2023 130777

 A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework

TABLE 3. (Continued.) ML dimension results. {N [↑∗ /→, slope]} denotes the number of papers, a statistically significant increasing trend (p-value
≤0.05)/no-trend present, and the slope value in case of trend existence, respectively.

organize and categorize their findings, fostering a more edge about the new era of data-driven services, thus
coherent and systematic research environment. From an upgrading the capabilities of existing applications when the
industry standpoint, involved stakeholders can gain knowl- functionalities of model-driven techniques are inadequate

130778 VOLUME 11, 2023

A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework

TABLE 4. Top-20 R0-topics (key latent factors) as generated by BERTopic and their interpretation (labels) by experts.

TABLE 5. Top-40 T0-topics (key latent factors) as generated by BERTopic and their interpretation (labels) by experts.

to provide high-quality insight into the decision-making companies to be at the forefront of innovation, capitalizing
processes and strategic planning. The application areas and on the latest insights and methodologies in the B2G domain.
underlying services defined in the upper levels of the first Hence, these data-driven services and enabled applications
taxonomy dimension can be a roadmap for the energy sector could be integrated into the Distributed Energy Resources

VOLUME 11, 2023 130779

 A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
Management System (DERMS), VPP management system,
Advanced Distribution Management System (ADMS), and
Building Management System (BMS) based on their scope
and functionalities.
Regarding the first taxonomy dimension, the most dom-
inant ascending trends (↑∗ ) exist in Forecasting (slope =
5.4), Energy management & control (slope = 4.25), Fault
prevention, diagnosis, and protection (slope = 3), and Storage
and EV analytics (slope = 2.58) services. The least increasing
trends are observed, even though they are still significant,
in Restoration (slope = 0.57), OPF (slope = 0.31), and
Non-technical losses (slope = 0.2) services. From an ML
perspective, DL methods have an immense ascending trend
in the literature (↑∗ , slope = 14.42), as well as SL compared
to the other learning approaches concerning the existence of
labelled data.
By crystallizing the services’ analysis knowledge, most
applications include standalone services for each energy
domain, i.e., electricity, gas, and heating networks. A limited
number of works develop data-driven multi-energy-related
services and applications [249], [250]. Therefore, to realize
a Power-to-X integrated electricity system, it is necessary
to develop ML-based applications that optimally manage
it in different time horizons while strengthening grid
reliability.
One of the main issues in developing ML applications is
the lack of data for optimal hyperparameter configuration and
training. To deal with that, several methods, such as SSL,
AL, and TL, have been employed, each of them using a
different approach. TL has been used most widely compared
to the other two, while SSL has demonstrated the most
remarkable ascending trend lately. We strongly believe that
the research community has to turn its attention to developing
more ML-based applications considering the data scarcity
issue because, in real-life applications, there are limitations
in labelled data, mainly associated with a lack of historical
data (especially in applications with high-data resolution),
increased costs in the data collection process, and issues with
consumer’s data privacy.
Adopting and utilizing DL-based approaches in opera-
tional environments of critical infrastructures, like power
systems, requires transparency and trust in decision-making.
Therefore, methods increasing the explainability and inter-
pretability of data-driven DL have also gained the research
community’s interest in B2G-integrated system analytics
services. However, additional aspects such as model robust-
ness and fairness shall be ensured toward Trustworthy AI,
besides explainability and interoperability. A small fraction
of current work follows that direction, creating robust
ML-based applications with respect to data availability, grid
constraints and the inherent nature of data uncertainty [251],
[252], [253].
ML techniques effectively approximate complex systems,
reducing the computational burden associated with model-
driven approaches. ML models can make predictions and
decisions without relying on explicit mathematical formula-
130780
tions by learning patterns and relationships directly from data.
This enables faster computations and improved scalability,
particularly for high-dimensional problems. However, most
developed methods and applications concern the execution
of training and inference on cloud-based resources without
exploring any edge device implementation. Developing
services for real-time applications running at the edge
while satisfying low-latency requirements and operational
standards without performance deterioration is still not a hot
research topic in B2G analytics services. Real-time ML could
be used in fault diagnosis and restoration services, signif-
icantly decreasing the application latency while increasing
the reliability index. On top of that, there is not much work
investigating the deployment of ML models on resource-
constrained devices, except for those concerning the control
and fault detection of IoT-enabled appliances [254], [255].
Future research could emphasize developing data-driven
applications for grid operation, protection and maintenance,
prioritizing energy efficiency, low latency, and reduced
data transfer to the cloud. Moreover, due to the latency-
constrained, real-time applications and emerging learning
frameworks, such as FL, the migration of computational
resources from the cloud to the devices near the network
edge will increase the need for AI-accelerated computa-
tional resources, e.g., neuromorphic Field Programmable
Gate Arrays (FPGAs) and Application-specific integrated
circuit (ASICs). Dedicated research must be conducted to
configure these resources based on the specific application
requirements optimally.
APPENDIX
BERTOPIC-BASED GENERATED TOPICS
See Tables 4 and 5.
REFERENCES
[1] A. F. Taha, N. Gatsis, B. Dong, A. Pipri, and Z. Li, ‘‘Buildings-to-
grid integration framework,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 2,
pp. 1237–1249, Mar. 2019.
[2] S. Papathanassiou et al., ‘‘Capacity of distribution feeders for hosting
distributed energy resources,’’ CIGRE, Int. Council Large Electr. Syst.,
2014.
[3] S. Barja-Martinez, M. Aragüés-Peñalba, Ì. Munné-Collado,
P. Lloret-Gallego, E. Bullich-Massagué, and R. Villafafila-Robles,
‘‘Artificial intelligence techniques for enabling big data services in
distribution networks: A review,’’ Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 150,
Oct. 2021, Art. no. 111459.
[4] A. Bachoumis, N. Andriopoulos, K. Plakas, A. Magklaras, P. Alefragis,
G. Goulas, A. Birbas, and A. Papalexopoulos, ‘‘Cloud-edge interop-
erability for demand response-enabled fast frequency response service
provision,’’ IEEE Trans. Cloud Comput., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 123–133,
Jan. 2022.
[5] M. Frankowska, K. Błoński, M. Mańkowska, and A. Rzeczycki,
‘‘Research on the concept of hydrogen supply chains and power grids
powered by renewable energy sources: A scoping review with the use of
text mining,’’ Energies, vol. 15, no. 3, p. 866, Jan. 2022.
[6] H. Huang, H. Wang, Y.-J. Hu, C. Li, and X. Wang, ‘‘The development
trends of existing building energy conservation and emission reduction—
A comprehensive review,’’ Energy Rep., vol. 8, pp. 13170–13188,
Nov. 2022.
[7] M. Grootendorst, ‘‘BERTopic: Neural topic modeling with a class-based
TF-IDF procedure,’’ 2022, arXiv:2203.05794.
VOLUME 11, 2023
A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
[8] A. B. Athanasios Bachoumis. SystRev4MLB2G. Accessed: Jul. 16, 2023.
[Online]. Available: https://github.com/tombax7/SystReviewML4B2G
[9] H. B. Mann, ‘‘Nonparametric tests against trend,’’ Econometrica, J. Econ.
Soc., vol. 13, no. 3, p. 245, Jul. 1945.
[10] R. Santodomingo, M. Uslar, A. Göring, M. Gottschalk, L. Nordström,
A. Saleem, and M. Chenine, ‘‘SGAM-based methodology to analyse
smart grid solutions in DISCERN European research project,’’ in Proc.
IEEE Int. Energy Conf. (ENERGYCON), May 2014, pp. 751–758.
[11] Z. Zhou, X. Chen, E. Li, L. Zeng, K. Luo, and J. Zhang, ‘‘Edge
intelligence: Paving the last mile of artificial intelligence with edge
computing,’’ Proc. IEEE, vol. 107, no. 8, pp. 1738–1762, Aug. 2019.
[12] A. Kaplan, T. Kühn, S. Hahner, N. Benkler, J. Keim, D. Fuchß, S. Corallo,
and R. Heinrich, ‘‘Introducing an evaluation method for taxonomies,’’ in
Proc. Int. Conf. Eval. Assessment Softw. Eng., Jun. 2022, pp. 311–316.
[13] M. G. Kendall, Rank Correlation Methods. Griffin, 1948.
[14] M. Hussain and I. Mahmud, ‘‘PyMannKendall: A Python package for non
parametric Mann Kendall family of trend tests,’’ J. Open Source Softw.,
vol. 4, no. 39, p. 1556, Jul. 2019.
[15] D. M. Blei, A. Y. Ng, and M. I. Jordan, ‘‘Latent Dirichlet allocation,’’
J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 3, pp. 993–1022, Mar. 2003.
[16] N. Reimers and I. Gurevych, ‘‘Sentence-BERT: Sentence embeddings
using Siamese BERT-networks,’’ in Proc. Conf. Empirical Methods
Natural Lang. Process. 9th Int. Joint Conf. Natural Lang. Process.
(EMNLP-IJCNLP), 2019, pp. 3982–3992.
[17] L. McInnes, J. Healy, and J. Melville, ‘‘UMAP: Uniform mani-
fold approximation and projection for dimension reduction,’’ 2018,
arXiv:1802.03426.
[18] J. A. Hartigan and M. A. Wong, ‘‘Algorithm as 136: A k-means clustering
algorithm,’’ J. Roy. Stat. Soc. Ser. C, Appl. Statist., vol. 28, no. 1,
pp. 100–108, 1979.
[19] L. McInnes, J. Healy, and S. Astels, ‘‘Hdbscan: Hierarchical density based
clustering,’’ J. Open Source Softw., vol. 2, no. 11, p. 205, Mar. 2017.
[20] J. Carbonell and J. Goldstein, ‘‘The use of MMR, diversity-based
reranking for reordering documents and producing summaries,’’ in Proc.
21st Annu. Int. ACM SIGIR Conf. Res. Develop. Inf. Retr., Aug. 1998,
pp. 335–336.
[21] D. Newman, J. H. Lau, K. Grieser, and T. Baldwin, ‘‘Automatic evaluation
of topic coherence,’’ in Proc. Hum. Lang. Technol., Annu. Conf. North
Amer. Chapter Assoc. Comput. Linguistics, 2010, pp. 100–108.
[22] D. Mimno, H. Wallach, E. Talley, M. Leenders, and A. McCallum,
‘‘Optimizing semantic coherence in topic models,’’ in Proc. Conf.
Empirical Methods Natural Lang. Process., 2011, pp. 262–272.
[23] N. Aletras and M. Stevenson, ‘‘Measuring the similarity between
automatically generated topics,’’ in Proc. 14th Conf. Eur. Chapter Assoc.
Comput. Linguistics, Short Papers, vol. 2, 2014, pp. 22–27.
[24] J. M. Gillis and W. G. Morsi, ‘‘A novel flexible and scalable nonintrusive
load monitoring approach using wavelet design and machine learning,’’
in Proc. IEEE Can. Conf. Electr. Comput. Eng. (CCECE), Sep. 2022,
pp. 441–445.
[25] D. Jung, H. H. Nguyen, and D. K. Y. Yau, ‘‘Tracking appliance usage
information using harmonic signature sensing,’’ in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf.
Smart Grid Commun. (SmartGridComm), Nov. 2015, pp. 459–465.
[26] F. Dinar, R. Chayla, S. Paris, and É. Busvelle, ‘‘A low-level set of
stationary features dedicated to non-intrusive load monitoring,’’ in Proc.
10th Int. Conf. Syst. Control (ICSC), Nov. 2022, pp. 435–441.
[27] F. Pöttker, A. E. Lazzaretti, D. P. B. Renaux, R. R. Linhares, C. R. E. Lima,
H. C. Ancelmo, and B. M. Mulinari, ‘‘Non-intrusive load monitoring: A
multi-agent architecture and results,’’ in Proc. 2nd Eur. Conf. Electr. Eng.
Comput. Sci. (EECS), Dec. 2018, pp. 328–334.
[28] G. Zhou, Z. Li, M. Fu, Y. Feng, X. Wang, and C. Huang, ‘‘Sequence-to-
sequence load disaggregation using multiscale residual neural network,’’
IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 70, pp. 1–10, 2021.
[29] M. A. Mengistu, A. A. Girmay, C. Camarda, A. Acquaviva, and
E. Patti, ‘‘A cloud-based on-line disaggregation algorithm for home
appliance loads,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 3430–3439,
May 2019.
[30] D. S. Kumar, K. L. Low, A. Sharma, and W. L. Woo, ‘‘Non-intrusive load
monitoring using feed forward neural network,’’ in Proc. IEEE Innov.
Smart Grid Technol. Asia (ISGT Asia), May 2019, pp. 4065–4069.
[31] C. L. Athanasiadis, T. A. Papadopoulos, and D. I. Doukas, ‘‘Real-time
non-intrusive load monitoring: A light-weight and scalable approach,’’
Energy Buildings, vol. 253, Dec. 2021, Art. no. 111523.
VOLUME 11, 2023
[32] Y. Wang, Q. Chen, D. Gan, J. Yang, D. S. Kirschen, and C. Kang, ‘‘Deep
learning-based socio-demographic information identification from smart
meter data,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 2593–2602,
May 2019.
[33] S. Yilmaz, J. Chambers, and M. K. Patel, ‘‘Comparison of clustering
approaches for domestic electricity load profile characterisation–
implications for demand side management,’’ Energy, vol. 180,
pp. 665–677, Aug. 2019.
[34] J. Lin, J. Ma, and J. G. Zhu, ‘‘Estimation of household characteristics with
uncertainties from smart meter data,’’ Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst.,
vol. 143, Dec. 2022, Art. no. 108440.
[35] R. Kaur and D. Gabrijelčič, ‘‘Behavior segmentation of electricity
consumption patterns: A cluster analytical approach,’’ Knowl.-Based
Syst., vol. 251, Sep. 2022, Art. no. 109236.
[36] C. Zhang, S. R. Kuppannagari, R. Kannan, and V. K. Prasanna,
‘‘Generative adversarial network for synthetic time series data generation
in smart grids,’’ in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Commun., Control, Comput.
Technol. Smart Grids (SmartGridComm), Oct. 2018, pp. 1–6.
[37] X. Wang, Y. Wang, D. Shi, J. Wang, and Z. Wang, ‘‘Two-stage WECC
composite load modeling: A double deep Q-learning networks approach,’’
IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 4331–4344, Sep. 2020.
[38] F. Bu, Z. Ma, Y. Yuan, and Z. Wang, ‘‘WECC composite load
model parameter identification using evolutionary deep reinforcement
learning,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 5407–5417,
Nov. 2020.
[39] B. Yilmaz and R. Korn, ‘‘Synthetic demand data generation for individual
electricity consumers: Generative adversarial networks (GANs),’’ Energy
AI, vol. 9, Aug. 2022, Art. no. 100161.
[40] H. Shaker, H. Zareipour, and D. Wood, ‘‘A data-driven approach for
estimating the power generation of invisible solar sites,’’ IEEE Trans.
Smart Grid, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 2466–2476, Sep. 2016.
[41] J. Lin, J. Ma, and J. Zhu, ‘‘A privacy-preserving federated learn-
ing method for probabilistic community-level behind-the-meter solar
generation disaggregation,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 13, no. 1,
pp. 268–279, Jan. 2022.
[42] E. C. Kara, C. M. Roberts, M. Tabone, L. Alvarez, D. S. Callaway,
and E. M. Stewart, ‘‘Disaggregating solar generation from feeder-level
measurements,’’ Sustain. Energy, Grids Netw., vol. 13, pp. 112–121,
Mar. 2018.
[43] K. Li, F. Wang, Z. Mi, M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad, N. Duić, and T. Wang,
‘‘Capacity and output power estimation approach of individual behind-
the-meter distributed photovoltaic system for demand response baseline
estimation,’’ Appl. Energy, vol. 253, Nov. 2019, Art. no. 113595.
[44] V. Le and X. Yao, ‘‘Ensemble machine learning based adaptive arc
fault detection for DC distribution systems,’’ in Proc. IEEE Appl. Power
Electron. Conf. Expo. (APEC), Mar. 2019, pp. 1984–1989.
[45] A. K. Gupta, A. Routray, and V. A. Naikan, ‘‘Series arc fault detection
in low voltage distribution system with signal processing and machine
learning approach,’’ in Proc. IECON 47th Annu. Conf. IEEE Ind.
Electron. Soc., Oct. 2021, pp. 1–6.
[46] H. Lala and S. Karmakar, ‘‘Detection and experimental validation
of high impedance arc fault in distribution system using empirical
mode decomposition,’’ IEEE Syst. J., vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 3494–3505,
Sep. 2020.
[47] C. Hu, N. Qu, and S. Zhang, ‘‘Series arc fault detection based on
continuous wavelet transform and DRSN-CW with limited source data,’’
Sci. Rep., vol. 12, no. 1, Jul. 2022, Art. no. 12809.
[48] D. Wu, D. Kalathil, M. M. Begovic, K. Q. Ding, and L. Xie, ‘‘Deep
reinforcement learning-based robust protection in DER-rich distribution
grids,’’ IEEE Open Access J. Power Energy, vol. 9, pp. 537–548, 2022.
[49] S. Ishaq, I. Khan, S. Rahman, T. Hussain, A. Iqbal, and R. M. Elavarasan,
‘‘A review on recent developments in control and optimization of micro
grids,’’ Energy Rep., vol. 8, pp. 4085–4103, Nov. 2022.
[50] P. Zeng, S. Cui, C. Song, Z. Wang, and G. Li, ‘‘A multiagent
deep deterministic policy gradient-based distributed protection method
for distribution network,’’ Neural Comput. Appl., vol. 35, no. 3,
pp. 2267–2278, Jan. 2023.
[51] D. S. Lestari, M. Pujiantara, M. H. Purnomo, and D. Rahmatullah,
‘‘Adaptive DOCR coordination in loop distribution system with dis-
tributed generation using firefly algorithm-artificial neural network,’’
in Proc. Int. Conf. Inf. Commun. Technol. (ICOIACT), Mar. 2018,
pp. 579–584.
130781
 A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
[52] V. Rizeakos, A. Bachoumis, N. Andriopoulos, M. Birbas, and A. Birbas,
‘‘Deep learning-based application for fault location identification and
type classification in active distribution grids,’’ Appl. Energy, vol. 338,
May 2023, Art. no. 120932.
[53] W. Fei and P. Moses, ‘‘Fault current tracing and identification via
machine learning considering distributed energy resources in distribution
networks,’’ Energies, vol. 12, no. 22, p. 4333, Nov. 2019.
[54] L. Souto, J. Meléndez, and S. Herraiz, ‘‘Fault location in low voltage
smart grids based on similarity criteria in the principal component
subspace,’’ in Proc. IEEE Power Energy Soc. Innov. Smart Grid Technol.
Conf. (ISGT), Feb. 2020, pp. 1–5.
[55] N. Sapountzoglou, J. Lago, B. De Schutter, and B. Raison, ‘‘A
generalizable and sensor-independent deep learning method for fault
detection and location in low-voltage distribution grids,’’ Appl. Energy,
vol. 276, Oct. 2020, Art. no. 115299.
[56] E. Balouji and O. Salor, ‘‘Classification of power quality events using
deep learning on event images,’’ in Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Pattern Recognit.
Image Anal. (IPRIA), Apr. 2017, pp. 216–221.
[57] Z. Chen, M. Li, T. Ji, and Q. Wu, ‘‘Real-time recognition of power
quality disturbance-based deep belief network using embedded parallel
computing platform,’’ IEEJ Trans. Electr. Electron. Eng., vol. 15, no. 4,
pp. 519–526, Apr. 2020.
[58] Y. Gao, Y. Li, Y. Zhu, C. Wu, and D. Gu, ‘‘Power quality disturbance
classification under noisy conditions using adaptive wavelet threshold and
DBN-ELM hybrid model,’’ Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 204, Mar. 2022,
Art. no. 107682.
[59] A. Bagheri, I. Y. H. Gu, M. H. J. Bollen, and E. Balouji, ‘‘A
robust transform-domain deep convolutional network for voltage dip
classification,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 2794–2802,
Dec. 2018.
[60] M. Dong and A. Nassif, ‘‘A data-driven residential transformer overload-
ing risk assessment method,’’ in Proc. IEEE Power Energy Soc. Gen.
Meeting (PESGM), Aug. 2020, p. 1.
[61] F. Kabir, B. Foggo, and N. Yu, ‘‘Data driven predictive maintenance
of distribution transformers,’’ in Proc. China Int. Conf. Electr. Distrib.
(CICED), Sep. 2018, pp. 312–316.
[62] Q. Lu and W. Zhang, ‘‘An integrated damage modeling and assessment
framework for overhead power distribution systems considering tree-
failure risks,’’ Struct. Infrastruct. Eng., vol. 19, no. 12, pp. 1745–1760,
Dec. 2023.
[63] D. T. Radmer, P. A. Kuntz, R. D. Christie, S. S. Venkata, and
R. H. Fletcher, ‘‘Predicting vegetation-related failure rates for over-
head distribution feeders,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Del., vol. 17, no. 4,
pp. 1170–1175, Oct. 2002.
[64] L. Bellani, M. Compare, E. Zio, A. Bosisio, B. Greco, G. Iannarelli,
and A. Morotti, ‘‘A reliability-centered methodology for identifying
renovation actions for improving resilience against heat waves in power
distribution grids,’’ Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 137, May 2022,
Art. no. 107813.
[65] N. L. Dehghani, A. B. Jeddi, and A. Shafieezadeh, ‘‘Intelligent
hurricane resilience enhancement of power distribution systems via
deep reinforcement learning,’’ Appl. Energy, vol. 285, Mar. 2021,
Art. no. 116355.
[66] Z.-C. Zhou, Z. Wu, and T. Jin, ‘‘Deep reinforcement learning framework
for resilience enhancement of distribution systems under extreme weather
events,’’ Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 128, Jun. 2021,
Art. no. 106676.
[67] V.-V. Thanh and W. Su, ‘‘Data-driven model predictive control-based
proactive scheduling for commercial microgrid considering anomaly
detection,’’ IEEE Syst. J., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 443–454, Mar. 2023.
[68] H. Xiu, J. He, X. Zhang, L. Wang, and Y. Qi, ‘‘HRC-mCNNs: A
hybrid regression and classification multibranch CNNs for automatic
meter reading with smart shell,’’ IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 9, no. 24,
pp. 25752–25766, Dec. 2022.
[69] B. Pei, Y. Peng, and Y. Luo, ‘‘A method of detecting defects of smart
meter LCD screen based on LSD and deep learning,’’ Multimedia Tools
Appl., vol. 80, nos. 28–29, pp. 35955–35972, Nov. 2021.
[70] L. Kang, B. Li, J. Liu, E. Wang, X. Fang, and D. Huang, ‘‘Health analysis
method of batch smart electricity meter based on K-nearest neighbor
algorithm,’’ in Proc. CAA Symp. Fault Detection, Supervision, Saf. Tech.
Processes (SAFEPROCESS), Dec. 2021, pp. 1–5.
130782
[71] H. V. Dubara, M. Parihar, and K. Ramamritham, ‘‘Smart energy meter
calibration: An edge computation method: Poster,’’ in Proc. 12th ACM
Int. Conf. Future Energy Syst., Jun. 2021, pp. 280–281.
[72] S. Lee, S. H. Nengroo, H. Jin, Y. Doh, C. Lee, T. Heo, and D. Har,
‘‘Anomaly detection of smart metering system for power management
with battery storage system/electric vehicle,’’ ETRI J., vol. 45, no. 4,
pp. 650–665, Aug. 2023.
[73] S. L. Qaddoori and Q. I. Ali, ‘‘An embedded and intelligent anomaly
power consumption detection system based on smart metering,’’ IET
Wireless Sensor Syst., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 75–90, Apr. 2023.
[74] P. P. Kasaraneni, Y. Venkata Pavan Kumar, G. L. K. Moganti, and
R. Kannan, ‘‘Machine learning-based ensemble classifiers for anomaly
handling in smart home energy consumption data,’’ Sensors, vol. 22,
no. 23, p. 9323, Nov. 2022.
[75] R. Moghaddass and J. Wang, ‘‘A hierarchical framework for smart grid
anomaly detection using large-scale smart meter data,’’ IEEE Trans.
Smart Grid, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 5820–5830, Nov. 2018.
[76] T. Hu, Q. Guo, X. Shen, H. Sun, R. Wu, and H. Xi, ‘‘Utilizing unlabeled
data to detect electricity fraud in AMI: A semisupervised deep learning
approach,’’ IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst., vol. 30, no. 11,
pp. 3287–3299, Nov. 2019.
[77] A. Arif, N. Javaid, A. Aldegheishem, and N. Alrajeh, ‘‘Big data analytics
for identifying electricity theft using machine learning approaches in
microgrids for smart communities,’’ Concurrency Comput., Pract. Exper.,
vol. 33, no. 17, Sep. 2021, Art. no. e6316.
[78] M. N. Hasan, R. N. Toma, A.-A. Nahid, M. M. M. Islam, and J.-M. Kim,
‘‘Electricity theft detection in smart grid systems: A CNN-LSTM based
approach,’’ Energies, vol. 12, no. 17, p. 3310, Aug. 2019.
[79] C. Cody, V. Ford, and A. Siraj, ‘‘Decision tree learning for fraud detection
in consumer energy consumption,’’ in Proc. IEEE 14th Int. Conf. Mach.
Learn. Appl. (ICMLA), Dec. 2015, pp. 1175–1179.
[80] S. Malekshah, A. Rasouli, Y. Malekshah, A. Ramezani, and
A. Malekshah, ‘‘Reliability-driven distribution power network dynamic
reconfiguration in presence of distributed generation by the deep
reinforcement learning method,’’ Alexandria Eng. J., vol. 61, no. 8,
pp. 6541–6556, Aug. 2022.
[81] X. Ji, Z. Yin, Y. Zhang, B. Xu, and Q. Liu, ‘‘Real-time autonomous
dynamic reconfiguration based on deep learning algorithm for dis-
tribution network,’’ Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 195, Jun. 2021,
Art. no. 107132.
[82] Y. Gao, W. Wang, J. Shi, and N. Yu, ‘‘Batch-constrained reinforcement
learning for dynamic distribution network reconfiguration,’’ IEEE Trans.
Smart Grid, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 5357–5369, Nov. 2020.
[83] M. Dabbaghjamanesh and J. Zhang, ‘‘Deep learning-based real-time
switching of reconfigurable microgrids,’’ in Proc. IEEE Power Energy
Soc. Innov. Smart Grid Technol. Conf. (ISGT), Feb. 2020, pp. 1–5.
[84] T. Zhao and J. Wang, ‘‘Learning sequential distribution system restoration
via graph-reinforcement learning,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 37,
no. 2, pp. 1601–1611, Mar. 2022.
[85] J. C. Bedoya, Y. Wang, and C.-C. Liu, ‘‘Distribution system resilience
under asynchronous information using deep reinforcement learning,’’
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 4235–4245, Sep. 2021.
[86] I. Kalysh, M. Kenzhina, N. Kaiyrbekov, H. S. V. S. K. Nunna, A. Dadlani,
and S. Doolla, ‘‘Machine learning-based service restoration scheme for
smart distribution systems with DGs and high priority loads,’’ in Proc.
Int. Conf. Smart Energy Syst. Technol. (SEST), Sep. 2019, pp. 1–6.
[87] Y. Zhang, F. Qiu, T. Hong, Z. Wang, and F. Li, ‘‘Hybrid imitation learning
for real-time service restoration in resilient distribution systems,’’ IEEE
Trans. Ind. Informat., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 2089–2099, Mar. 2022.
[88] M. R. Alam, K. M. Muttaqi, and A. Bouzerdoum, ‘‘Evaluating the
effectiveness of a machine learning approach based on response time and
reliability for islanding detection of distributed generation,’’ IET Renew.
Power Gener., vol. 11, no. 11, pp. 1392–1400, Sep. 2017.
[89] A. Ezzat, B. E. Elnaghi, and A. A. Abdelsalam, ‘‘Microgrids islanding
detection using Fourier transform and machine learning algorithm,’’
Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 196, Jul. 2021, Art. no. 107224.
[90] M. A. Kumar and A. J. Laxmi, ‘‘Machine learning based intentional
islanding algorithm for DERs in disaster management,’’ IEEE Access,
vol. 9, pp. 85300–85309, 2021.
[91] S. Alshareef, S. Talwar, and Walid. G. Morsi, ‘‘A new approach based on
wavelet design and machine learning for islanding detection of distributed
generation,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 1575–1583,
Jul. 2014.
VOLUME 11, 2023
A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
[92] X. Wang, Y. Liu, J. Zhao, C. Liu, J. Liu, and J. Yan, ‘‘Surrogate
model enabled deep reinforcement learning for hybrid energy community
operation,’’ Appl. Energy, vol. 289, May 2021, Art. no. 116722.
[93] T. Chen, S. Bu, X. Liu, J. Kang, F. R. Yu, and Z. Han, ‘‘Peer-to-peer energy
trading and energy conversion in interconnected multi-energy microgrids
using multi-agent deep reinforcement learning,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid,
vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 715–727, Jan. 2022.
[94] Y. Ye, Y. Tang, H. Wang, X.-P. Zhang, and G. Strbac, ‘‘A scalable privacy-
preserving multi-agent deep reinforcement learning approach for large-
scale peer-to-peer transactive energy trading,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid,
vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 5185–5200, Nov. 2021.
[95] S. Zhang, D. May, P. Atrazhev, M. Gul, and P. Musilek, ‘‘Flexibility
platform for community energy systems,’’ in Proc. CIRED Berlin
Workshop (CIRED), Sep. 2020, pp. 669–671.
[96] M. Peters, W. Ketter, M. Saar-Tsechansky, and J. Collins, ‘‘A rein-
forcement learning approach to autonomous decision-making in smart
electricity markets,’’ Mach. Learn., vol. 92, no. 1, pp. 5–39, Jul. 2013.
[97] K. Dehghanpour, M. H. Nehrir, J. W. Sheppard, and N. C. Kelly,
‘‘Agent-based modeling of retail electrical energy markets with demand
response,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 3465–3475,
Jul. 2018.
[98] B. Wang, Y. Li, W. Ming, and S. Wang, ‘‘Deep reinforcement learning
method for demand response management of interruptible load,’’ IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 3146–3155, Jul. 2020.
[99] G. Yang, S. Du, Q. Duan, and J. Su, ‘‘Deep reinforcement learning-
based trading strategy for load aggregators on price-responsive demand,’’
Comput. Intell. Neurosci., vol. 2022, pp. 1–14, Sep. 2022.
[100] E. Prat and S. Chatzivasileiadis, ‘‘Learning active constraints to
efficiently solve linear bilevel problems: Application to the generator
strategic bidding problem,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 38, no. 3,
pp. 2376–2387, May 2023.
[101] L. Lin, X. Guan, Y. Peng, N. Wang, S. Maharjan, and T. Ohtsuki, ‘‘Deep
reinforcement learning for economic dispatch of virtual power plant in
Internet of energy,’’ IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 7, no. 7, pp. 6288–6301,
Jul. 2020.
[102] S. S. Gougheri, H. Jahangir, M. A. Golkar, A. Ahmadian, and
M. A. Golkar, ‘‘Optimal participation of a virtual power plant in
electricity market considering renewable energy: A deep learning-
based approach,’’ Sustain. Energy, Grids Netw., vol. 26, Jun. 2021,
Art. no. 100448.
[103] Z. Luo, S. Hong, and Y. Ding, ‘‘A data mining-driven incentive-based
demand response scheme for a virtual power plant,’’ Appl. Energy,
vol. 239, pp. 549–559, Apr. 2019.
[104] M. Sun, Y. Wang, F. Teng, Y. Ye, G. Strbac, and C. Kang, ‘‘Clustering-
based residential baseline estimation: A probabilistic perspective,’’ IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 6014–6028, Nov. 2019.
[105] Y. Weng and R. Rajagopal, ‘‘Probabilistic baseline estimation via
Gaussian process,’’ in Proc. IEEE Power Energy Soc. Gen. Meeting,
Jul. 2015, pp. 1–5.
[106] S. Park, S. Ryu, Y. Choi, J. Kim, and H. Kim, ‘‘Data-driven baseline
estimation of residential buildings for demand response,’’ Energies,
vol. 8, no. 9, pp. 10239–10259, Sep. 2015.
[107] A. Barbato, A. Capone, M. Rodolfi, and D. Tagliaferri, ‘‘Forecasting the
usage of household appliances through power meter sensors for demand
management in the smart grid,’’ in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Smart Grid
Commun. (SmartGridComm), Oct. 2011, pp. 404–409.
[108] E. U. Haq, X. Lyu, Y. Jia, M. Hua, and F. Ahmad, ‘‘Forecasting
household electric appliances consumption and peak demand based on
hybrid machine learning approach,’’ Energy Rep., vol. 6, pp. 1099–1105,
Dec. 2020.
[109] N. Dey, S. Fong, W. Song, and K. Cho, ‘‘Forecasting energy consumption
from smart home sensor network by deep learning,’’ in Proc. Int. Conf.
Smart Trends Inf. Technol. Comput. Commun., Pune, India, Aug. 2017,
pp. 255–265.
[110] Y. Ji, E. Buechler, and R. Rajagopal, ‘‘Data-driven load modeling and
forecasting of residential appliances,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 11,
no. 3, pp. 2652–2661, May 2020.
[111] Z. Guo, K. Zhou, X. Zhang, and S. Yang, ‘‘A deep learning model
for short-term power load and probability density forecasting,’’ Energy,
vol. 160, pp. 1186–1200, Oct. 2018.
[112] W. Kong, Z. Y. Dong, D. J. Hill, F. Luo, and Y. Xu, ‘‘Short-term residential
load forecasting based on resident behaviour learning,’’ IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 1087–1088, Jan. 2018.
VOLUME 11, 2023
[113] S. Ai, A. Chakravorty, and C. Rong, ‘‘Household power demand
prediction using evolutionary ensemble neural network pool with
multiple network structures,’’ Sensors, vol. 19, no. 3, p. 721, Feb. 2019.
[114] H. Shi, Q. Ma, N. Smith, and F. Li, ‘‘Data-driven uncertainty quantifica-
tion and characterization for household energy demand across multiple
time-scales,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 3092–3102,
May 2019.
[115] M. Sun, T. Zhang, Y. Wang, G. Strbac, and C. Kang, ‘‘Using Bayesian
deep learning to capture uncertainty for residential net load forecasting,’’
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 188–201, Jan. 2020.
[116] Y. Wang, N. Zhang, Q. Chen, D. S. Kirschen, P. Li, and Q. Xia, ‘‘Data-
driven probabilistic net load forecasting with high penetration of behind-
the-meter PV,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 3255–3264,
May 2018.
[117] B. Zhou, Y. Meng, W. Huang, H. Wang, L. Deng, S. Huang, and
J. Wei, ‘‘Multi-energy net load forecasting for integrated local energy
systems with heterogeneous prosumers,’’ Int. J. Electr. Power Energy
Syst., vol. 126, Mar. 2021, Art. no. 106542.
[118] G. Tziolis, C. Spanias, M. Theodoride, S. Theocharides,
J. Lopez-Lorente, A. Livera, G. Makrides, and G. E. Georghiou, ‘‘Short-
term electric net load forecasting for solar-integrated distribution systems
based on Bayesian neural networks and statistical post-processing,’’
Energy, vol. 271, May 2023, Art. no. 127018.
[119] H. Ding, Y. Xu, B. C. S. Hao, Q. Li, and A. Lentzakis, ‘‘A safe
reinforcement learning approach for multi-energy management of smart
home,’’ Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 210, Sep. 2022, Art. no. 108120.
[120] A. Majumdar, G. Singh, A. Swarnkar, N. Gupta, and K. Niazi,
‘‘Dynamic electricity pricing by modified Levenberg–Marquardt back-
propagation (LMBP) algorithm,’’ in Intelligent Computing Tech-
niques for Smart Energy Systems. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2022,
pp. 591–608.
[121] C. Naumzik and S. Feuerriegel, ‘‘Forecasting electricity prices with
machine learning: Predictor sensitivity,’’ Int. J. Energy Sector Manage.,
vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 157–172, Jan. 2021.
[122] A. Lucas, K. Pegios, E. Kotsakis, and D. Clarke, ‘‘Price forecasting for the
balancing energy market using machine-learning regression,’’ Energies,
vol. 13, no. 20, p. 5420, Oct. 2020.
[123] A. Alzahrani, P. Shamsi, C. Dagli, and M. Ferdowsi, ‘‘Solar irradiance
forecasting using deep neural networks,’’ Proc. Comput. Sci., vol. 114,
pp. 304–313, Jan. 2017.
[124] F. Wang, Z. Xuan, Z. Zhen, Y. Li, K. Li, L. Zhao, M. Shafie-Khah, and
J. P. S. Catalão, ‘‘A minutely solar irradiance forecasting method based
on real-time sky image-irradiance mapping model,’’ Energy Convers.
Manage., vol. 220, Sep. 2020, Art. no. 113075.
[125] J. Li, J. K. Ward, J. Tong, L. Collins, and G. Platt, ‘‘Machine learning
for solar irradiance forecasting of photovoltaic system,’’ Renew. Energy,
vol. 90, pp. 542–553, May 2016.
[126] C. Huang, L. Wang, and L. L. Lai, ‘‘Data-driven short-term
solar irradiance forecasting based on information of neighboring
sites,’’ IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron., vol. 66, no. 12, pp. 9918–9927,
Dec. 2019.
[127] H. Jahangir, H. Tayarani, S. S. Gougheri, M. A. Golkar, A. Ahmadian, and
A. Elkamel, ‘‘Deep learning-based forecasting approach in smart grids
with microclustering and bidirectional LSTM network,’’ IEEE Trans. Ind.
Electron., vol. 68, no. 9, pp. 8298–8309, Sep. 2021.
[128] R. Ak, O. Fink, and E. Zio, ‘‘Two machine learning approaches for
short-term wind speed time-series prediction,’’ IEEE Trans. Neural Netw.
Learn. Syst., vol. 27, no. 8, pp. 1734–1747, Aug. 2016.
[129] M. Monfared, H. Rastegar, and H. M. Kojabadi, ‘‘A new strategy for wind
speed forecasting using artificial intelligent methods,’’ Renew. Energy,
vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 845–848, Mar. 2009.
[130] Z.-H. Guo, J. Wu, H.-Y. Lu, and J.-Z. Wang, ‘‘A case study on a hybrid
wind speed forecasting method using BP neural network,’’ Knowl.-Based
Syst., vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 1048–1056, Oct. 2011.
[131] C. Qin, A. K. Srivastava, A. Y. Saber, D. Matthews, and K. Davies,
‘‘Geometric deep-learning-based spatiotemporal forecasting for inverter-
based solar power,’’ IEEE Syst. J., vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 3425–3435,
Sep. 2023.
[132] M. Q. Raza, N. Mithulananthan, J. Li, K. Y. Lee, and H. B. Gooi,
‘‘An ensemble framework for day-ahead forecast of PV output power in
smart grids,’’ IEEE Trans. Ind. Informat., vol. 15, no. 8, pp. 4624–4634,
Aug. 2019.
130783
 A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
[133] A. A. du Plessis, J. M. Strauss, and A. J. Rix, ‘‘Short-term solar power
forecasting: Investigating the ability of deep learning models to capture
low-level utility-scale photovoltaic system behaviour,’’ Appl. Energy,
vol. 285, Mar. 2021, Art. no. 116395.
[134] M. Jurado, M. Samper, and R. Rosés, ‘‘An improved encoder–decoder-
based CNN model for probabilistic short-term load and PV forecasting,’’
Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 217, Apr. 2023, Art. no. 109153.
[135] H.-Z. Wang, G.-Q. Li, G.-B. Wang, J.-C. Peng, H. Jiang, and Y.-T. Liu,
‘‘Deep learning based ensemble approach for probabilistic wind power
forecasting,’’ Appl. Energy, vol. 188, pp. 56–70, Feb. 2017.
[136] D. Zheng, M. Shi, Y. Wang, A. Eseye, and J. Zhang, ‘‘Day-ahead wind
power forecasting using a two-stage hybrid modeling approach based
on SCADA and meteorological information, and evaluating the impact
of input-data dependency on forecasting accuracy,’’ Energies, vol. 10,
no. 12, p. 1988, Dec. 2017.
[137] J. Sarshar, S. S. Moosapour, and M. Joorabian, ‘‘Multi-objective energy
management of a micro-grid considering uncertainty in wind power
forecasting,’’ Energy, vol. 139, pp. 680–693, Nov. 2017.
[138] P. Scarabaggio, S. Grammatico, R. Carli, and M. Dotoli, ‘‘Distributed
demand side management with stochastic wind power forecasting,’’ IEEE
Trans. Control Syst. Technol., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 97–112, Jan. 2022.
[139] Y. Zheng, H. Yu, Z. Shao, and L. Jian, ‘‘Day-ahead bidding strategy for
electric vehicle aggregator enabling multiple agent modes in uncertain
electricity markets,’’ Appl. Energy, vol. 280, Dec. 2020, Art. no. 115977.
[140] Q. Dang, D. Wu, and B. Boulet, ‘‘A Q-learning based charging scheduling
scheme for electric vehicles,’’ in Proc. IEEE Transp. Electrific. Conf.
Expo. (ITEC), Jun. 2019, pp. 1–5.
[141] K. Wang, H. Wang, J. Yang, J. Feng, Y. Li, S. Zhang, and M. O. Okoye,
‘‘Electric vehicle clusters scheduling strategy considering real-time
electricity prices based on deep reinforcement learning,’’ Energy Rep.,
vol. 8, pp. 695–703, Jul. 2022.
[142] D. Liu, P. Zeng, S. Cui, and C. Song, ‘‘Deep reinforcement learning for
charging scheduling of electric vehicles considering distribution network
voltage stability,’’ Sensors, vol. 23, no. 3, p. 1618, Feb. 2023.
[143] F. S. Gorostiza and F. M. Gonzalez-Longatt, ‘‘Deep reinforcement
learning-based controller for SOC management of multi-electrical energy
storage system,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 5039–5050,
Nov. 2020.
[144] M. Al-Saffar and P. Musilek, ‘‘Reinforcement learning-based distributed
BESS management for mitigating overvoltage issues in systems with high
PV penetration,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 2980–2994,
Jul. 2020.
[145] J. Cao, D. Harrold, Z. Fan, T. Morstyn, D. Healey, and K. Li, ‘‘Deep
reinforcement learning-based energy storage arbitrage with accurate
lithium-ion battery degradation model,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 11,
no. 5, pp. 4513–4521, Sep. 2020.
[146] R. Xiong, J. Cao, and Q. Yu, ‘‘Reinforcement learning-based real-time
power management for hybrid energy storage system in the plug-in hybrid
electric vehicle,’’ Appl. Energy, vol. 211, pp. 538–548, Feb. 2018.
[147] T. Gao and W. Lu, ‘‘Machine learning toward advanced energy storage
devices and systems,’’ iScience, vol. 24, no. 1, Jan. 2021, Art. no. 101936.
[148] M. Kamruzzaman, X. Zhang, M. Abdelmalak, D. Shi, and M. Benidris,
‘‘A data-driven accurate battery model to use in probabilistic analyses of
power systems,’’ J. Energy Storage, vol. 44, Dec. 2021, Art. no. 103292.
[149] A. H. Almarzooqi, M. O. Alhusin, I. P. Nikolakakos, A. Husnain, and
H. M. Albeshr, ‘‘Improved NaS battery state of charge estimation by
means of temporal fusion transformer,’’ in Proc. IEEE Texas Power
Energy Conf. (TPEC), Feb. 2023, pp. 1–6.
[150] M. T. Vellingiri, I. M. Mehedi, and T. Palaniswamy, ‘‘A novel
deep learning-based state-of-charge estimation for renewable energy
management system in hybrid electric vehicles,’’ Mathematics, vol. 10,
no. 2, p. 260, Jan. 2022.
[151] J. A. Velasco, H. Amaris, and M. Alonso, ‘‘Deep learning loss model for
large-scale low voltage smart grids,’’ Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst.,
vol. 121, Oct. 2020, Art. no. 106054.
[152] S. Wang, H. Chen, B. Pu, H. Zhang, S. Jin, and X. Liu, ‘‘Analysis of
network loss energy measurement based on machine learning,’’ in Proc.
IEEE Int. Conf. Inf. Autom. (ICIA), Aug. 2018, pp. 1113–1117.
[153] C. Ma, J.-H. Menke, J. Dasenbrock, M. Braun, M. Haslbeck, and
K.-H. Schmid, ‘‘Evaluation of energy losses in low voltage distribution
grids with high penetration of distributed generation,’’ Appl. Energy,
vol. 256, Dec. 2019, Art. no. 113907.
130784
[154] M.-S. Kang, C.-S. Chen, C.-H. Lin, C.-W. Huang, and M.-F. Kao,
‘‘A systematic loss analysis of Taipower distribution system,’’ IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 1062–1068, Aug. 2006.
[155] L. Duchesne, E. Karangelos, and L. Wehenkel, ‘‘Using machine learning
to enable probabilistic reliability assessment in operation planning,’’ in
Proc. Power Syst. Comput. Conf. (PSCC), Jun. 2018, pp. 1–8.
[156] X. Fu, ‘‘Statistical machine learning model for capacitor planning
considering uncertainties in photovoltaic power,’’ Protection Control
Modern Power Syst., vol. 7, no. 1, p. 5, Dec. 2022.
[157] X. Fu, Q. Guo, and H. Sun, ‘‘Statistical machine learning model
for stochastic optimal planning of distribution networks considering a
dynamic correlation and dimension reduction,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid,
vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 2904–2917, Jul. 2020.
[158] W. Sun, M. Zamani, M. R. Hesamzadeh, and H.-T. Zhang, ‘‘Data-driven
probabilistic optimal power flow with nonparametric Bayesian modeling
and inference,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 1077–1090,
Mar. 2020.
[159] P. Dai, L. Yang, Y. Zeng, M. Niu, C. Zhu, Z. Hu, and Y. Zhao, ‘‘Data-
driven reliability evaluation of the integrated energy system considering
optimal service restoration,’’ Frontiers Energy Res., vol. 10, Jul. 2022,
Art. no. 934774.
[160] L. Zhu, K. Long, Z. Dong, and K. Hou, ‘‘Two-dimensional convolution-
based power system reliability assessment,’’ Energy Rep., vol. 9,
pp. 472–478, May 2023.
[161] B. Zhang, K. Hou, Z. Dong, Z. Liu, and X. Wang, ‘‘Stacked-denoising-
auto-encoder-based reliability assessment method for power system
operation,’’ Energy Rep., vol. 9, pp. 505–511, Mar. 2023.
[162] M. Kamruzzaman, N. Bhusal, and M. Benidris, ‘‘A convolutional
neural network-based approach to composite power system reliability
evaluation,’’ Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 135, Feb. 2022,
Art. no. 107468.
[163] M. Ashrafuzzaman, S. Das, Y. Chakhchoukh, S. Shiva, and F. T. Sheldon,
‘‘Detecting stealthy false data injection attacks in the smart grid using
ensemble-based machine learning,’’ Comput. Secur., vol. 97, Oct. 2020,
Art. no. 101994.
[164] Y. Cui, F. Bai, Y. Liu, P. L. Fuhr, and M. E. Morales-Rodríguez, ‘‘Spatio-
temporal characterization of synchrophasor data against spoofing attacks
in smart grids,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 5807–5818,
Sep. 2019.
[165] S. Liu, S. You, H. Yin, Z. Lin, Y. Liu, W. Yao, and L. Sundaresh, ‘‘Model-
free data authentication for cyber security in power systems,’’ IEEE Trans.
Smart Grid, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 4565–4568, Sep. 2020.
[166] M. Keshk, B. Turnbull, N. Moustafa, D. Vatsalan, and K. R. Choo,
‘‘A privacy-preserving-framework-based blockchain and deep learning
for protecting smart power networks,’’ IEEE Trans. Ind. Informat.,
vol. 16, no. 8, pp. 5110–5118, Aug. 2020.
[167] T. Wu, W. Xue, H. Wang, C. Y. Chung, G. Wang, J. Peng, and Q. Yang,
‘‘Extreme learning machine-based state reconstruction for automatic
attack filtering in cyber physical power system,’’ IEEE Trans. Ind.
Informat., vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 1892–1904, Mar. 2021.
[168] J. Cao, D. Wang, Z. Qu, M. Cui, P. Xu, K. Xue, and K. Hu, ‘‘A novel
false data injection attack detection model of the cyber-physical power
system,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 95109–95125, 2020.
[169] P. Wang and M. Govindarasu, ‘‘Multi-agent based attack-resilient system
integrity protection for smart grid,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 11,
no. 4, pp. 3447–3456, Jul. 2020.
[170] S. Ahmed, Y. Lee, S.-H. Hyun, and I. Koo, ‘‘Unsupervised machine
learning-based detection of covert data integrity assault in smart grid
networks utilizing isolation forest,’’ IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Security,
vol. 14, no. 10, pp. 2765–2777, Oct. 2019.
[171] T. S. Ustun, S. M. S. Hussain, L. Yavuz, and A. Onen, ‘‘Artificial
intelligence based intrusion detection system for IEC 61850 sampled
values under symmetric and asymmetric faults,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 9,
pp. 56486–56495, 2021.
[172] I. Siniosoglou, P. Radoglou-Grammatikis, G. Efstathopoulos, P. Fouliras,
and P. Sarigiannidis, ‘‘A unified deep learning anomaly detection and
classification approach for smart grid environments,’’ IEEE Trans. Netw.
Service Manage., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 1137–1151, Jun. 2021.
[173] R. Vinayakumar, M. Alazab, K. P. Soman, P. Poornachandran,
A. Al-Nemrat, and S. Venkatraman, ‘‘Deep learning approach
for intelligent intrusion detection system,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 7,
pp. 41525–41550, 2019.
VOLUME 11, 2023
A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
[174] X. Lou, C. Tran, R. Tan, D. K. Y. Yau, Z. T. Kalbarczyk, A. K. Banerjee,
and P. Ganesh, ‘‘Assessing and mitigating impact of time delay attack:
Case studies for power grid controls,’’ IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun.,
vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 141–155, Jan. 2020.
[175] W. Huang, X. Zhang, and W. Zheng, ‘‘Resilient power network structure
for stable operation of energy systems: A transfer learning approach,’’
Appl. Energy, vol. 296, Aug. 2021, Art. no. 117065.
[176] M. Zhang, J. Li, Y. Li, and R. Xu, ‘‘Deep learning for short-term
voltage stability assessment of power systems,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 9,
pp. 29711–29718, 2021.
[177] S. Kumar, B. Tyagi, V. Kumar, and S. Chohan, ‘‘PMU-based voltage
stability measurement under contingency using ANN,’’ IEEE Trans.
Instrum. Meas., vol. 71, pp. 1–11, 2022.
[178] F. Aydin and B. Gümüs, ‘‘Study of different ANN algorithms for voltage
stability analysis,’’ in Proc. Innov. Intell. Syst. Appl. Conf. (ASYU),
Oct. 2020, pp. 1–5.
[179] T. Huang, Q. Guo, H. Sun, C. Tan, and T. Hu, ‘‘A deep learning approach
for power system knowledge discovery based on multitask learning,’’ IET
Gener., Transmiss. Distrib., vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 733–740, Mar. 2019.
[180] L. Aththanayake, N. Hosseinzadeh, and A. Gargoom, ‘‘Dynamic
equivalent of a power network by deep artificial neural networks under
varying power system operating conditions,’’ in Proc. IEEE PES 14th
Asia–Pacific Power Energy Eng. Conf. (APPEEC), Nov. 2022, pp. 1–7.
[181] Y. Du, F. Li, T. Zheng, and J. Li, ‘‘Fast cascading outage screening
based on deep convolutional neural network and depth-first search,’’ IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 2704–2715, Jul. 2020.
[182] J. Hou, Q. Zhai, and X. Guan, ‘‘Fast prediction and avoidance of
cascading line failures based on ANN with feedbacks,’’ Int. J. Electr.
Power Energy Syst., vol. 145, Feb. 2023, Art. no. 108655.
[183] Y. Xu, K. Wang, W. Wei, X. Wang, J. Liu, and K. Li, ‘‘Coordi-
nated preventive-corrective control for power system transient stability
enhancement based on machine learning-assisted optimization,’’ in
Proc. Asian Conf. Frontiers Power Energy (ACFPE), Oct. 2022,
pp. 517–524.
[184] J. Huang, L. Guan, Y. Su, H. Yao, M. Guo, and Z. Zhong,
‘‘Recurrent graph convolutional network-based multi-task transient
stability assessment framework in power system,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 8,
pp. 93283–93296, 2020.
[185] S. P. Nandanoori, S. Guan, S. Kundu, S. Pal, K. Agarwal, Y. Wu, and S.
Choudhury, ‘‘Graph neural network and Koopman models for learning
networked dynamics: A comparative study on power grid transients
prediction,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 32337–32349, 2022.
[186] B. Zhou, K. Wang, W. Wei, Z. Chen, D. Jin, X. Ye, J. Liu, and L. Li,
‘‘Power system transient stability preventive control based on deep cross
network,’’ in Proc. IEEE/IAS Ind. Commercial Power Syst. Asia (I&CPS
Asia), Jul. 2022, pp. 1586–1591.
[187] E. Hailemariam, R. Goldstein, R. Attar, and A. Khan, ‘‘Real-time
occupancy detection using decision trees with multiple sensor types,’’ in
Proc. Symp. Simulation Archit. Urban Design, 2011, pp. 141–148.
[188] M. Khalil, S. McGough, Z. Pourmirza, M. Pazhoohesh, and S. Walker,
‘‘Transfer learning approach for occupancy prediction in smart build-
ings,’’ in Proc. 12th Int. Renew. Eng. Conf. (IREC), Apr. 2021,
pp. 1–6.
[189] M. Elsisi, M.-Q. Tran, K. Mahmoud, M. Lehtonen, and
M. M. F. Darwish, ‘‘Deep learning-based Industry 4.0 and Internet
of Things towards effective energy management for smart buildings,’’
Sensors, vol. 21, no. 4, p. 1038, Feb. 2021.
[190] C. Feng, A. Mehmani, and J. Zhang, ‘‘Deep learning-based real-time
building occupancy detection using AMI data,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid,
vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 4490–4501, Sep. 2020.
[191] B. Wu, W. Cai, F. Cheng, and H. Chen, ‘‘Simultaneous-fault diagnosis
considering time series with a deep learning transformer architecture
for air handling units,’’ Energy Buildings, vol. 257, Feb. 2022,
Art. no. 111608.
[192] M. Dey, S. P. Rana, and S. Dudley, ‘‘Smart building creation in
large scale HVAC environments through automated fault detection
and diagnosis,’’ Future Gener. Comput. Syst., vol. 108, pp. 950–966,
Jul. 2020.
[193] A. Behravan, M. Abboush, and R. Obermaisser, ‘‘Deep learning
application in mechatronics Systems’ fault diagnosis, a case study of the
demand-controlled ventilation and heating system,’’ in Proc. Adv. Sci.
Eng. Technol. Int. Conferences (ASET), Mar. 2019, pp. 1–6.
VOLUME 11, 2023
[194] M. Dey, M. Gupta, M. Turkey, and S. Dudley, ‘‘Unsupervised learning
techniques for HVAC terminal unit behaviour analysis,’’ in Proc. IEEE
SmartWorld, Ubiquitous Intell. Comput., Adv. Trusted Comput., Scalable
Comput. Commun., Cloud Big Data Comput., Internet People Smart City
Innov. (SmartWorld/SCALCOM/UIC/ATC/CBDCom/IOP/SCI), Turkey,
Aug. 2017, pp. 1–7.
[195] K. Chen, S. Bose, and Y. Zhang, ‘‘Unsupervised deep learning for AC
optimal power flow via Lagrangian duality,’’ in Proc. GLOBECOM IEEE
Global Commun. Conf., Dec. 2022, pp. 5305–5310.
[196] X. Pan, M. Chen, T. Zhao, and S. H. Low, ‘‘DeepOPF: A feasibility-
optimized deep neural network approach for AC optimal power flow
problems,’’ IEEE Syst. J., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 673–683, Mar. 2023.
[197] J. Rahman, C. Feng, and J. Zhang, ‘‘A learning-augmented approach for
AC optimal power flow,’’ Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 130,
Sep. 2021, Art. no. 106908.
[198] X. Pan, T. Zhao, M. Chen, and S. Zhang, ‘‘DeepOPF: A deep neural
network approach for security-constrained DC optimal power flow,’’
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 1725–1735, May 2021.
[199] M. Gasse, D. Chételat, N. Ferroni, L. Charlin, and A. Lodi, ‘‘Exact
combinatorial optimization with graph convolutional neural networks,’’
in Proc. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst., vol. 32, 2019, pp. 15580–15592.
[200] R. Canyasse, G. Dalal, and S. Mannor, ‘‘Supervised learning for optimal
power flow as a real-time proxy,’’ in Proc. IEEE Power Energy Soc. Innov.
Smart Grid Technol. Conf. (ISGT), Apr. 2017, pp. 1–5.
[201] S. Misra, L. Roald, and Y. Ng, ‘‘Learning for constrained optimization:
Identifying optimal active constraint sets,’’ INFORMS J. Comput., vol. 34,
no. 1, pp. 463–480, Jan. 2022.
[202] K. Baker and A. Bernstein, ‘‘Joint chance constraints reduction through
learning in active distribution networks,’’ in Proc. IEEE Global Conf.
Signal Inf. Process. (GlobalSIP), Nov. 2018, pp. 922–926.
[203] A. Gupta, Y. Badr, A. Negahban, and R. G. Qiu, ‘‘Energy-efficient heating
control for smart buildings with deep reinforcement learning,’’ J. Building
Eng., vol. 34, Feb. 2021, Art. no. 101739.
[204] Y. Du, H. Zandi, O. Kotevska, K. Kurte, J. Munk, K. Amasyali, E. Mckee,
and F. Li, ‘‘Intelligent multi-zone residential HVAC control strategy based
on deep reinforcement learning,’’ Appl. Energy, vol. 281, Jan. 2021,
Art. no. 116117.
[205] J. Vázquez-Canteli, J. Kämpf, and Z. Nagy, ‘‘Balancing comfort and
energy consumption of a heat pump using batch reinforcement learning
with fitted Q-iteration,’’ Energy Proc., vol. 122, pp. 415–420, Sep. 2017.
[206] K. Kurte, K. Amasyali, J. Munk, and H. Zandi, ‘‘Deep reinforcement
learning with online data augmentation to improve sample efficiency for
intelligent HVAC control,’’ in Proc. 9th ACM Int. Conf. Syst. Energy-
Efficient Buildings, Cities, Transp., Nov. 2022, pp. 479–483.
[207] K. Nweye, B. Liu, P. Stone, and Z. Nagy, ‘‘Real-world challenges for
multi-agent reinforcement learning in grid-interactive buildings,’’ Energy
AI, vol. 10, Nov. 2022, Art. no. 100202.
[208] H. Huang, Y. Cai, H. Xu, and H. Yu, ‘‘A multiagent minority-game-
based demand-response management of smart buildings toward peak load
reduction,’’ IEEE Trans. Comput.-Aided Design Integr. Circuits Syst.,
vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 573–585, Apr. 2017.
[209] S.-J. Chen, W.-Y. Chiu, and W.-J. Liu, ‘‘User preference-based demand
response for smart home energy management using multiobjective
reinforcement learning,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 9, pp. 161627–161637, 2021.
[210] F. Alfaverh, M. Denaï, and Y. Sun, ‘‘Demand response strategy
based on reinforcement learning and fuzzy reasoning for home energy
management,’’ IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 39310–39321, 2020.
[211] A. Sheikhi, M. Rayati, and A. M. Ranjbar, ‘‘Demand side management
for a residential customer in multi-energy systems,’’ Sustain. Cities Soc.,
vol. 22, pp. 63–77, Apr. 2016.
[212] J. Zhou, M. Yang, Y. Zhan, and L. Xu, ‘‘Digital twin application
for reinforcement learning based optimal scheduling and reliability
management enhancement of systems,’’ Sol. Energy, vol. 252, pp. 29–38,
Mar. 2023.
[213] L. Xiong, Y. Tang, C. Liu, S. Mao, K. Meng, Z. Dong, and F. Qian, ‘‘Meta-
reinforcement learning-based transferable scheduling strategy for energy
management,’’ IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I, Reg. Papers, vol. 70, no. 4,
pp. 1685–1695, Apr. 2023.
[214] L. Yu, W. Xie, D. Xie, Y. Zou, D. Zhang, Z. Sun, L. Zhang, Y. Zhang,
and T. Jiang, ‘‘Deep reinforcement learning for smart home energy
management,’’ IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 2751–2762,
Apr. 2020.
130785
 A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
[215] P. Wilk, N. Wang, and J. Li, ‘‘A multi-agent deep reinforcement learning
based energy management for behind-the-meter resources,’’ Electr. J.,
vol. 35, no. 5, Jun. 2022, Art. no. 107129.
[216] F. Rezazadeh and N. Bartzoudis, ‘‘A federated DRL approach for smart
micro-grid energy control with distributed energy resources,’’ in Proc.
IEEE 27th Int. Workshop Comput. Aided Modeling Design Commun.
Links Netw. (CAMAD), Nov. 2022, pp. 108–114.
[217] S. Lee, L. Xie, and D.-H. Choi, ‘‘Privacy-preserving energy management
of a shared energy storage system for smart buildings: A federated deep
reinforcement learning approach,’’ Sensors, vol. 21, no. 14, p. 4898,
Jul. 2021.
[218] A. Prasad and I. Dusparic, ‘‘Multi-agent deep reinforcement learning for
zero energy communities,’’ in Proc. IEEE PES Innov. Smart Grid Technol.
Eur. (ISGT-Eur.), Sep. 2019, pp. 1–5.
[219] Y. Li, R. Wang, and Z. Yang, ‘‘Optimal scheduling of isolated
microgrids using automated reinforcement learning-based multi-period
forecasting,’’ IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 159–169,
Jan. 2022.
[220] L. Lei, Y. Tan, G. Dahlenburg, W. Xiang, and K. Zheng, ‘‘Dynamic
energy dispatch based on deep reinforcement learning in IoT-driven
smart isolated microgrids,’’ IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 8, no. 10,
pp. 7938–7953, May 2021.
[221] Y. Li, Z. Xu, K. B. Bowes, and L. Ren, ‘‘Reinforcement learning-enabled
seamless microgrids interconnection,’’ in Proc. IEEE Power Energy Soc.
Gen. Meeting (PESGM), Jul. 2021, pp. 1–5.
[222] V. François-Lavet, D. Taralla, D. Ernst, and R. Fonteneau, ‘‘Deep
reinforcement learning solutions for energy microgrids management,’’
in Proc. Eur. Workshop Reinforcement Learn. (EWRL), 2016,
pp. 1–7.
[223] C. Mu, K. Wang, S. Ma, Z. Chong, and Z. Ni, ‘‘Adaptive compos-
ite frequency control of power systems using reinforcement learn-
ing,’’ CAAI Trans. Intell. Technol., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 671–684,
Dec. 2022.
[224] M. H. Khooban and M. Gheisarnejad, ‘‘A novel deep reinforcement
learning controller based type-II fuzzy system: Frequency regulation in
microgrids,’’ IEEE Trans. Emerg. Topics Comput. Intell., vol. 5, no. 4,
pp. 689–699, Aug. 2021.
[225] A. A. Aly, B. F. Felemban, A. Mohammadzadeh, O. Castillo, and
A. Bartoszewicz, ‘‘Frequency regulation system: A deep learning iden-
tification, type-3 fuzzy control and LMI stability analysis,’’ Energies,
vol. 14, no. 22, p. 7801, Nov. 2021.
[226] M. Esmaeili, H. Shayeghi, H. Mohammad Nejad, and A. Younesi,
‘‘Reinforcement learning based PID controller design for LFC in a
microgrid,’’ COMPEL Int. J. Comput. Math. Electr. Electron. Eng.,
vol. 36, no. 4, pp. 1287–1297, Jul. 2017.
[227] W. Wang, N. Yu, Y. Gao, and J. Shi, ‘‘Safe off-policy deep reinforce-
ment learning algorithm for volt-VAR control in power distribution
systems,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 3008–3018,
Jul. 2020.
[228] Y. Gao, W. Wang, and N. Yu, ‘‘Consensus multi-agent reinforcement
learning for volt-VAR control in power distribution networks,’’ IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 3594–3604, Jul. 2021.
[229] M. K. Singh, S. Gupta, and V. Kekatos, ‘‘Machine learning for optimal
inverter operation in distribution grids,’’ in Proc. 55th Annu. Conf. Inf.
Sci. Syst. (CISS), Mar. 2021, p. 1.
[230] Y. Chen, Y. Shi, and B. Zhang, ‘‘Data-driven optimal voltage regulation
using input convex neural networks,’’ Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 189,
Dec. 2020, Art. no. 106741.
[231] Z. S. Hosseini, A. Khodaei, and A. Paaso, ‘‘Machine learning-enabled
distribution network phase identification,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 842–850, Mar. 2021.
[232] M. Bariya, D. Deka, and A. von Meier, ‘‘Guaranteed phase & topology
identification in three phase distribution grids,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid,
vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 3605–3612, Jul. 2021.
[233] S. García, J. M. Mora-Merchán, D. F. Larios, E. Personal, A. Parejo,
and C. León, ‘‘Phase topology identification in low-voltage distribution
networks: A Bayesian approach,’’ Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst.,
vol. 144, Jan. 2023, Art. no. 108525.
[234] H. Yu, Y. Wu, W. Guan, D. Zhang, T. Yu, and Q. Liu, ‘‘Practi-
cal method for data-driven user phase identification in low-voltage
distribution networks,’’ Frontiers Energy Res., vol. 9, Nov. 2021,
Art. no. 752571.
130786
[235] L. Ma, L. Wang, and Z. Liu, ‘‘Topology identification of
distribution networks using a split-EM based data-driven
approach,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 2019–2031,
May 2022.
[236] Y. Zhu, X. Xu, and Z. Yan, ‘‘Learning-based line impedance estimation
for partially observable distribution systems,’’ Int. J. Electr. Power Energy
Syst., vol. 137, May 2022, Art. no. 107803.
[237] W. Jiang, J. Chen, H. Tang, S. Cheng, Q. Hu, M. Cai, and S. Rahman,
‘‘A physical probabilistic network model for distribution network
topology recognition using smart meter data,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart Grid,
vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 6965–6973, Nov. 2019.
[238] Y. Liao, Y. Weng, G. Liu, and R. Rajagopal, ‘‘Urban MV and LV
distribution grid topology estimation via group lasso,’’ IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 12–27, Jan. 2019.
[239] A. Winter, M. Igel, and P. Schegner, ‘‘Supervised learning approach
for state estimation in distribution systems with missing input data,’’ in
Proc. IEEE PES Innov. Smart Grid Technol. Eur. (ISGT Eur.), Oct. 2021,
pp. 1–5.
[240] B. Das, ‘‘Rule based algorithm for meter placement and ANN based bus
voltage estimation in radial power distribution system,’’ Electr. Power
Compon. Syst., vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 449–462, Feb. 2005.
[241] P. N. P. Barbeiro, H. Teixeira, J. Krstulovic, J. Pereira, and F. J. Soares,
‘‘Exploiting autoencoders for three-phase state estimation in unbalanced
distributions grids,’’ Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 123, pp. 108–118,
Jun. 2015.
[242] A. S. Zamzam, X. Fu, and N. D. Sidiropoulos, ‘‘Data-driven learning-
based optimization for distribution system state estimation,’’ IEEE Trans.
Power Syst., vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 4796–4805, Nov. 2019.
[243] M. Pertl, P. J. Douglass, K. Heussen, and K. Kok, ‘‘Validation of a robust
neural real-time voltage estimator for active distribution grids on field
data,’’ Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 154, pp. 182–192, Jan. 2018.
[244] V. Bassi, L. F. Ochoa, T. Alpcan, and C. Leckie, ‘‘Electrical model-free
voltage calculations using neural networks and smart meter data,’’ IEEE
Trans. Smart Grid, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 3271–3282, Jul. 2023.
[245] A. Delode, J. Lopez-Lorente, G. Makrides, and G. E. Georghiou,
‘‘Voltage state estimation in a microgrid with temporal convolutional
network and various feature dimensions,’’ in Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. Energy
Transition Medit. Area (SyNERGY MED), Oct. 2022, pp. 1–6.
[246] Y. Wang, L. Von Krannichfeldt, T. Zufferey, and J.-F. Toubeau, ‘‘Short-
term nodal voltage forecasting for power distribution grids: An ensemble
learning approach,’’ Appl. Energy, vol. 304, Dec. 2021, Art. no. 117880.
[247] P. Stefanidou-Voziki, N. Sapountzoglou, B. Raison, and
J. L. Dominguez-Garcia, ‘‘A review of fault location and classification
methods in distribution grids,’’ Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 209,
Aug. 2022, Art. no. 108031.
[248] B. McMahan, E. Moore, D. Ramage, S. Hampson, and B. A. Arcas,
‘‘Communication-efficient learning of deep networks from decentralized
data,’’ in Proc. Artif. Intell. Statist., 2017, pp. 1273–1282.
[249] Z. Li, L. Wu, Y. Xu, S. Moazeni, and Z. Tang, ‘‘Multi-stage real-time
operation of a multi-energy microgrid with electrical and thermal energy
storage assets: A data-driven MPC-ADP approach,’’ IEEE Trans. Smart
Grid, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 213–226, Jan. 2022.
[250] B. Zhang, W. Hu, D. Cao, A. M. Y. M. Ghias, and Z. Chen,
‘‘Novel data-driven decentralized coordination model for electric vehicle
aggregator and energy hub entities in multi-energy system using an
improved multi-agent DRL approach,’’ Appl. Energy, vol. 339, Jun. 2023,
Art. no. 120902.
[251] A. Stratigakos, P. Andrianesis, A. Michiorri, and G. Kariniotakis,
‘‘Towards resilient energy forecasting: A robust optimization approach,’’
IEEE Trans. Smart Grid, early access, May 2, 2023, doi: 10.1109/TSG.
2023.3272379.
[252] P. L. Donti, D. Rolnick, and J. Z. Kolter, ‘‘DC3: A learning method for
optimization with hard constraints,’’ 2021, arXiv:2104.12225.
[253] S.-H. Hong and H.-S. Lee, ‘‘Robust energy management system with
safe reinforcement learning using short-horizon forecasts,’’ IEEE Trans.
Smart Grid, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 2485–2488, May 2023.
[254] M. Giordano, N. Baumann, M. Crabolu, R. Fischer, G. Bellusci, and
M. Magno, ‘‘Design and performance evaluation of an ultralow-power
smart IoT device with embedded TinyML for asset activity monitoring,’’
IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 71, pp. 1–11, 2022.
[255] A. Metwaly, J. P. Queralta, V. K. Sarker, T. N. Gia, O. Nasir, and
T. Westerlund, ‘‘Edge computing with embedded AI: Thermal image
analysis for occupancy estimation in intelligent buildings,’’ in Proc. Intell.
Embedded Syst. Archit. Appl. Workshop, Oct. 2019, pp. 1–6.
VOLUME 11, 2023
A. Bachoumis et al.: Data-Driven Analytics for Reliability in the B2G Integrated System Framework
A. BACHOUMIS received the Diploma degree
from the School of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, University of Patras, Greece, in 2015,
and the M.Sc. degree in industrial engineering and
management from the University of Groningen,
The Netherlands, in 2018. He is currently pursuing
the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering with
the University of Patras in the research area
of data-driven applications for active distribu-
tion grids, transactive energy systems, and edge
intelligence. Previously, he was an Energy Research Associate with
the Greek Independent Power Transmission System Operator (IPTO)
and an ICT company, Ubitech Energy, Brussels, participating in energy
digitalization-related research and commercial projects.
C. MYLONAS was born in Athens, Greece.
He received the Diploma degree in electrical
and computer engineering from the University of
Patras, Greece, in 2016, and the M.Sc. degree in
energy science and technology from the Swiss
Federal Institute of Technology, Zürich, Switzer-
land, in 2020. He is currently pursuing the Ph.D.
degree in electrical engineering with the National
Technical University of Athens in the areas of
multi-agent systems, deep reinforcement learning,
and distributed AI applied to smart grids. In parallel, since 2020, he has been
a Research and Development Software Engineer with UBITECH. During the
M.Sc. degree, he was with the ABB Corporate Research Center, Switzerland.
K. PLAKAS received the B.Sc. degree in electrical
and computer engineering from the National
Technical University of Athens (NTUA), Athens,
Greece, and the M.Sc. degree in wind energy
from Danish Technical University (DTU), Kon-
gens Lyngby, Denmark, in 2019. He is currently
pursuing the Ph.D. degree in the field of bidding
strategies in the real-time electricity markets with
the University of Patras, Patras, Greece. He is
also a Research Engineer with the Department of
Research Technology and Development (DRTD), Greek TSO (IPTO). His
research interests include energy forecasting, the optimization of bidding
strategies, and electricity markets.
VOLUME 11, 2023
M. BIRBAS received the Diploma and Ph.D.
degrees in electrical and computer engineering
from the University of Patras, Greece, in 1985 and
1991, respectively. From 1992 to 1999, he was
the Research and Development Manager and
the Co-Founder of Synergy Systems, a high-
tech start-up microelectronics-related company.
From 1999 to 2002, he was a Research and
Development Manager with GIGA Hellas S.A-
an Intel Company, where he was involved with
the design of 10–40-Gbit/s Ser/Des components and system solution
demonstrators for optical transport networks. From 2002 to 2006, he was
with the Applied Electronics Laboratory Team, University of Patras, working
in high-speed mixed integrated circuits for communication applications and
in VLSI implementations of FEC algorithms. From 2006 to 2014, he was the
Research and Development Manager and the Co-Founder of Analogies S.A.,
a high-tech start-up company focusing on the design of high-performance,
multi gigabit, mixed signal/RF, and digital DSP silicon IP. He is currently
an Associate Professor with the University of Patras, where he has been
with the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, since 2014,
with his research activities focusing in smart grid applications, AI algorithms
and accelerators, digital twins, and advanced embedded designs. He is
the author/coauthor of several publications in international journals and
conferences (more than 100) and the co-inventor of a number of patents (five
of them registered at USPTO).
A. BIRBAS received the M.S.E.E. and Ph.D.
degrees from the University of Minnesota,
Minneapolis, MN, USA, in 1986 and 1988, respec-
tively. He has also held faculty positions with the
Assistant Professor level with the University of
Minnesota and INPG, Grenoble, France. He has
also co-founded two microelectronics-related
spinoff companies and has supervised 20 Ph.D.
theses. He is currently a Professor in electronics
with the Department of Electrical and Computer
Engineering, University of Patras, and the Director of the Applied
Electronics Laboratory, Patras Greece. He has also served as a Consultant to
the industry and has held industrial managerial positions. He has published
over 150 papers in scientific journals and conference proceedings. His
research interests include device electronics, optoelectronics, noise and
fluctuation problems in electronics, RF and mixed-signal high-speed circuit
design and implementation of sensor read-out circuits, smart grid electronics
and transactive energy systems, smart metering, the 5G enabled IoT and
industry 4.0 real-time applications, edge computing accelerators, and cyber-
physical systems.
130787