[petsc-users] TAOIPM for AC optimal power flow

[Justin Chang]

I don't know them off the top of my head. The power systems guys I'm
working with are still formulating the math for their ACOPF framework, but
all I know is that it's going to eventually need optimization solvers that
handle not only simply bound constraints but inequality/equality
constraints as well. At this point I don't really care whether it's IPM or
active-set.

On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 1:47 PM Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 5, 2018 at 3:23 PM Justin Chang via petsc-users <
> petsc-users at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I am working on a generic AC optimal power flow solver, and I hope to use
>> DMNetwork's data structure and TAO's optimization solvers for this purpose.
>> Last time I inquired about IPM (maybe 3-4 years ago) I was told that it's
>> not suitable for large-scale networks, which is the direction we're hoping
>> to go here at NREL. I see right now from the documentation website:
>>
>> "This algorithm is more of a place-holder for future constrained
>> optimization algorithms and should not yet be used for large problems or
>> production code."
>>
>> Is there any plans at the moment to have a high performance
>> implementation of IPM in TAO? It would be nice to have a purely PETSc code
>> instead of interfacing to something like IPOPT for the optimization.
>>
>
> Preliminary question. Are there reasons we expect IPM to be better than
> active sets?
>
>   Thanks,
>
>     Matt
>
>
>> Thanks,
>> Justin
>>
>
>
> --
> What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their
> experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their
> experiments lead.
> -- Norbert Wiener
>
> https://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~knepley/
> <http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~knepley/>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-users/attachments/20181105/93f117d5/attachment.html>