As the integration of volatile renewable energy sources increases the strain on modern power grids, the use of Reinforcement Learning (RL) for autonomous topological reconfiguration has emerged as a promising research field to keep strained grids stable and operational. Compared to traditional redispatching measures, topological actions offer a cheaper and more cost-effective way to manage grid congestion. However, their implementation is hindered by a vast combinatorial action space and strict operational constraints. This paper investigates the effectiveness of model-based AlphaZero-inspired approaches that utilize Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS) for proactive grid management. We systematically evaluate how reward functions, observation density, and search guidance influence an agent's survivability. Our results demonstrate that the optimized AlphaZero approach achieves a peak survivability of 98.43%, significantly outperforming the proximal policy optimization (PPO) variant. We find that conducting the MCTS without guidance from a prior learned policy or value function can enhance training efficiency, and that a straightforward binary survival reward provides more effective search guidance than complex, multi-objective functions. Our findings demonstrate that while AlphaZero is a powerful framework for topological control, pure reinforcement learning is not sufficient; rather, an effective and reliable system requires a 'minimalist' integration of domain-specific heuristics, binary rewards, and a restricted observation space of line loads.
Figures & tables
Year
Challenge Track
Approach / Agent Name
Key Methodology
2019
IJCNN (Sandbox)
DDQN-2019
Dueling DQN + Imitation Learning ( Lan et al., 2020 )
2020
WCCI (Robustness)
Semi-Markov Afterstate Actor-Critic (SMAAC)
SAC-based ( Yoon et al., 2021 )
2020
NeurIPS (Robustness)
Search with Action Set (SAS)
Evolutionary strategies (ES) ( Zhou et al., 2021 )
2021
ICAPS (Trust)
Different modes
Mix of SAS ( Marot et al., 2022 )
2022
WCCI (Adaptability)
AlphaZero
MCTS ( Dorfer et al., 2022 )
2023
L2RPN Delft (Remake of 2022)
PPO Rainbow-Based
PPO-Rainbow + Heuristics ( Sintes and Dang, 2024 ; Lehna et al., 2023 )
Table 1. Historical evolution of top-performing agents and methodologies in the Learning to Run a Power Network (L2RPN) challenges. The progression shows a shift from early model-free RL toward specialized architectures involving Curriculum Learning and model-based Tree Search.
Reduction Method
Total Actions (+ Do Nothing)
Complete
405
SYM
203
N-0
142
N-1
82
Table 2. Impact of Reduction Strategies on Action Space Size for IEEE-14
Configuration
Included Features
Minimal
Line loads ( ρ )
Custom
Line loads, line status, cooldowns, topology
Reduced
Line load, production, load, overflow, topology
Complete
All available Grid2op features including voltage and time
Table 3. Overview of Observation Space Configurations
Model
Avg. Steps survived
Std. dev.
DQN
89 (1.1%)
Do Nothing
847 (10.5%)
PPO Redispatch
1670 (20.7%)
PPO Topological
3250 (40.3%)
PPO Curriculum
4130 (51.22%)
PPO Rainbow
7403 (91.80%)
1372
Table 4. Peak performances of the different RL approaches compared to the Do Nothing agent. For the PPO Rainbow, AlphaZero Baseline and Alphzero D3QN-2022 we averaged the peaks over 4 runs. Additionally, we can also see the average standard deviation over the 101 training chronics for these.
Figure 1. Comparison of AlphaZero with the different PPO variants. The results for the AlphaZero baseline described in subsection B.2 , the AlphaZero with the D3QN-2022 reward function as well as the PPO rainbow variant are evaluated over 4 runs and plotted with their standard deviation using a sliding window for smoothing.
Figure 2. Training progression of the AlphaZero agent using the different reward functions presented in Appendix A.3 . The average performance is evaluated over 4 runs and plotted with the standard deviation using interpolation.
Figure 3. Training progression of the AlphaZero agent using the different action spaces presented in Section 3.2 . The average performance is evaluated over 4 runs and plotted with the standard deviation using interpolation.
Figure 4. Training progression of the AlphaZero agent using the different observation spaces presented in Section 3.2 . The average performance is evaluated over 4 runs and plotted with the standard deviation using interpolation.
Figure 5. Comparison of the three MCTS guidance methods of using learned prior and value function, learned prior and heuristic value function or no guidance at all.
Appendix figures & tables4 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 6. Evaluation of different horizon sizes for the heuristic based AlphaZero baseline approach.
Figure 7. Evaluation of different thresholds for the application of the heuristic that leads the agent back to the reference topology.
Figure 8. Evaluation of values for the tstopping and tskipped hyperparameters which define the early stopping mechanism for the MCTS tree.
Figure 9. Evaluation of the effect caused by different choices for the batch size which determines the number of chronics we collect data from between training iterations.
Topology control for power grid operation is a challenging sequential decision making problem because the action space grows combinatorially with the size of the grid and action evaluation through simulation is computationally expensive. We propose a physics-informed Reinforcement Learning framework that combines semi-Markov control with a Gibbs prior, that encodes the system's physics, over the action space. The decision is only taken when the grid enters a hazardous regime, while a graph neural network surrogate predicts the post action overload risk of feasible topology actions. These predictions are used to construct a physics-informed Gibbs prior that both selects a small state-dependent candidate set and reweights policy logits before action selection. In this way, our method reduces exploration difficulty and online simulation cost while preserving the flexibility of a learned policy. We evaluate the approach in three realistic benchmark environments of increasing difficulty. Across all settings, the proposed method achieves a strong balance between control quality and computational efficiency: it matches oracle-level performance while being approximately 6× faster on the first benchmark, reaches 94.6% of oracle reward with roughly 200× lower decision time on the second one, and on the most challenging benchmark improves over a PPO baseline by up to 255% in reward and 284% in survived steps while remaining about 2.5× faster than a strong specialized engineering baseline. These results show that our method provides an effective mechanism for topology control in power grids.
Pantelis Dogoulis, Maxime Cordy
SerVal, SnT, University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg City, Luxembourg
Reinforcement learning has shown promise for automating power-grid operation tasks such as topology control and congestion management. However, its deployment in real-world power systems remains limited by strict safety requirements, brittleness under rare disturbances, and poor generalization to unseen grid topologies. In safety-critical infrastructure, catastrophic failures cannot be tolerated, and learning-based controllers must operate within hard physical constraints. This paper proposes a safety-constrained hierarchical control framework for power-grid operation that explicitly decouples long-horizon decision-making from real-time feasibility enforcement. A high-level reinforcement learning policy proposes abstract control actions, while a deterministic runtime safety shield filters unsafe actions using fast forward simulation. Safety is enforced as a runtime invariant, independent of policy quality or training distribution. The proposed framework is evaluated on the Grid2Op benchmark suite under nominal conditions, forced line-outage stress tests, and zero-shot deployment on the ICAPS 2021 large-scale transmission grid without retraining. Results show that flat reinforcement learning policies are brittle under stress, while safety-only methods are overly conservative. In contrast, the proposed hierarchical and safety-aware approach achieves longer episode survival, lower peak line loading, and robust zero-shot generalization to unseen grids. These results indicate that safety and generalization in power-grid control are best achieved through architectural design rather than increasingly complex reward engineering, providing a practical path toward deployable learning-based controllers for real-world energy systems.
Gitesh Malik
Department of Electrical Engineering, Delhi Technological University (DTU), India
Deep reinforcement learning (RL) offers a promising route to real-time power grid operation, yet large neural policies are costly to evaluate, hard to deploy on constrained hardware, and opaque to operators. We ask whether a Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) agent for grid topology control can be compressed into compact tree-based surrogates without losing operational performance. A PPO teacher is trained on Grid2Op's standard 14-bus environment with a stability-oriented reward, using stress-focused data collection on critical, high-loading states. The policy is then distilled into a decision tree and a random forest. Across held-out validation episodes, both surrogates exceed the teacher in mean reward and survival length at a fraction of the inference cost. The decision tree shows high exact-action agreement with the PPO argmax and near-complete agreement within its top-ranked actions, while remaining small enough to be inspected directly. Feature-importance analysis reveals a representational shift: the PPO policy relies mainly on line-loading signals, while the distilled tree is driven primarily by bus-topology variables. These results suggest that stress-focused distillation can convert a black-box neural controller into a lightweight, auditable rule-like surrogate suited for real-time deployment, while also surfacing risks tied to deterministic actions and topology-specific generalization.
Aleksandra Dmitruka, Karlis Freivalds
University of Latvia, Faculty of Exact Sciences and Technology, Riga, Latvia