Safety interventions for large populations of network-coupled agents must protect shared constraints without unnecessarily overriding task-oriented policy decisions. We present HetGPS, a hybrid graph-control framework synergizing learned graph risk with physics-anchored correction by separating intervention magnitude from corrective direction. An action-conditioned graph residual model schedules state-dependent intervention authority, while a physics model determines its direction. For electric vehicle (EV) charging, we couple this filter with a parameter-shared heterogeneous graph soft actor-critic policy, enabling topology-aware coordination with a learned model size independent of fleet size. Across five nested distribution networks with 200--3,218 EVs and 100 evaluation days, Adaptive Authority reduces bus--step voltage violations from 3.93--7.74\% without filtering to 0.52--3.44\%, while maintaining 99.06--100\% departure success. Relative to the same physics-directed projection with fixed authority, it improves mean reward on all five networks and lowers the mean safety score on four. The deployed policy-and-risk model contains 383,702 learned parameters at every scale; at 3,218 EVs, a matched centralized SAC actor is about $170\times$ larger. A policy trained on the eight-transformer system transfers zero-shot to the 16- and 32-transformer systems, attaining 0.57--0.75\% violation rates and at least 99.99\% departure success. These results show that learned graph risk can allocate intervention authority at scale while feeder physics anchors corrective action.
Xavier Rate, Eloann Le Guern, Raphaël Féraud +8cs.AI
The electrification of transportation through electric vehicles introduces new challenges for power grid management, such as increased peak demand, voltage fluctuations, line overloads, and the integration of variable renewable energy sources. To enable efficient integration of EVs while minimizing costs for users and avoiding network overloads, implicit coordination between EVs is required. This work compares two independent multi-agent reinforcement learning approaches for optimizing such decentralized EV charging: contextual combinatorial bandits and policy gradient algorithms. Using a realistic simulation environment with autonomous agents making decisions based on local environmental information (including price signals, state-of-charge, and temporal constraints), we evaluate their performance across varying congestion levels, and mixed-strategy configurations with heterogeneous agent groups under dynamic electricity pricing derived from real photovoltaic production data.
Giuseppe Gabriele, Fabio Pavirani, Seyed Soroush Karimi Madahi +1cs.LG cs.AI
The recent growth of EV adoption poses challenges for power systems, including increased peak demand and potential grid instability. Smart control of EV charging -- e.g., based on reinforcement learning (RL) -- can alleviate these issues by learning temporal and contextual patterns from historical data. Yet, in real-world scenarios, key features, such as departure time, often are unavailable. This, in turn, makes it harder for an RL agent to learn and execute an effective charging policy. To mitigate this uncertainty, a trained forecaster can approximate the unknown features from available data. However, since these forecasting models are typically trained for accuracy (rather than their impact on a downstream agent's decision quality), their errors may propagate and hinder the overall performance of a controller that is using the forecasts. To avoid this, we propose a decision-focused RL (DF-RL) framework in which the forecaster is trained end-to-end, i.e., with feedback from the charging policy actions taken by the RL agent. Such joint training of both the forecaster and controller ultimately results in higher-quality actions: our proposed DF-RL method yields superior charging decisions compared to other baselines, achieving up to a 14% improvement in total reward and a 55% reduction of unsupplied energy (i.e., charging that failed to happen because the EV already left), relative to the RL method without departure time forecasting.