Paper detail

Interpretable Machine Learning for Power Systems: Establishing Confidence in SHapley Additive exPlanations

Interpretable Machine Learning (IML) is expected to remove significant barriers for the application of Machine Learning (ML) algorithms in power systems. This letter first seeks to showcase the benefits of SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) for understanding the outcomes of ML models, which are increasingly being used. Second, we seek to demonstrate that SHAP explanations are able to capture the underlying physics of the power system. To do so, we demonstrate that the Power Transfer Distribution Factors (PTDF) -- a physics-based linear sensitivity index -- can be derived from the SHAP values. To do so, we take the derivatives of SHAP values from a ML model trained to learn line flows from generator power injections, using a simple DC power flow case in the 9-bus 3-generator test network. In demonstrating that SHAP values can be related back to the physics that underpin the power system, we build confidence in the explanations SHAP can offer.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.