arXiv:1710.10727v2 [] 12 Mar 2018

Exact Topology and Parameter Estimation in
Distribution Grids with Minimal Observability
Sejun Park∗,†

Deepjyoti Deka†

Michael Chertkov†,§

(∗) KAIST, Daejeon, Korea
& (†) LANL, Los Alamos,
New Mexico, USA
sejun.park@kaist.ac.kr

(†) LANL, Los Alamos,
New Mexico, USA
deepjyoti@lanl.gov

(†) LANL, Los Alamos,
New Mexico, USA
& (§) Skoltech, Moscow, Russia
chertkov@lanl.gov

Abstract—Limited presence of nodal and line meters in distribution grids hinders their optimal operation and participation
in real-time markets. In particular lack of real-time information
on the grid topology and infrequently calibrated line parameters
(impedances) adversely affect the accuracy of any operational
power flow control. This paper suggests a novel algorithm
for learning the topology of distribution grid and estimating
impedances of the operational lines with minimal observational
requirements - it provably reconstructs topology and impedances
using voltage and injection measured only at the terminal (enduser) nodes of the distribution grid. All other (intermediate)
nodes in the network may be unobserved/hidden. Furthermore no
additional input (e.g., number of grid nodes, historical information on injections at hidden nodes) is needed for the learning to
succeed. Performance of the algorithm is illustrated in numerical
experiments on the IEEE and custom power distribution models.
Index Terms—Distribution networks, Missing data, Power
flows, Topology learning, Impedance estimation

I. I NTRODUCTION
Distribution grids include low and medium voltage lines
that enable supply of power to end-users/ loads. With the
advent of smart grids, new resources like controllable loads,
small-scale/household renewable generators (e.g. solar panels)
and storage units (e.g. batteries, electric vehicles) have been
introduced in the distribution grid. This paradigm shifting
change is turning traditionally passive and largely static distribution grids, that acted solely as power sinks, into dynamic, reconfigurable and active resources for novel controls.
Emerging smart grid control technologies, relying on these
dynamic and reconfigurable features, include participation in
demand response, use of batteries in frequency regulation and
inter-household energy settlements/transactions. These new
technologies also require much more accurate estimation of the
grid characteristics. The radial topology of current operational
lines, and their impedances are the most significant of these
frequently changing characteristics of the smart distribution
grids. However, reliable and real-time estimation of the distribution grid topology and line impedances is impeded by
This work is supported by the US DOE/OE’s Grid Modernization Laboratory Consortium (GMLC) program.

limited observability. Even though Phasor Measurement Unit
(PMU) technology has become available recently, it still
largely limited to power transmission systems [1]. It is not
obvious if a wide-spread (full coverage) use of the PMU technology will ever be economically justified at the distribution
level. Moreover, access to underground distribution grid in
urban areas (e.g. New York City) is technically challenging.
These constraints/limitations justify importance of developing
techniques capable of estimating operational topology and line
impedances in the situation of infrequent calibration and sparse
access.
In spite of the access limitations PMUs, micro-PMUs [2],
FNETs [3] have being placed into many distribution grids.
In addition, and most importantly for the setting discussed
in the manuscript, smart end-user measurement units, such
as ones associated with smart house-hold devices and EVs,
have been installed. These modern end-user devices have
the ability to record and communicate nodal voltages and
injections. Inspired by this novel capabilities we analyze in
this manuscript the joint problem of topology and impedance
estimation using measurements collected from smart meters
located only at the end/terminal nodes of the smart distribution
grids.
A. Prior Work
Topology estimation in the power grid is an active area
of research. Researchers have proposed different methods
depending on availability and type of measurements. [4]
uses cycle basis and maximum likelihood tests to reconstruct
topology from line measurements. For measurements of nodal
voltages collected at all nodes, [5], [6] uses the signs of inverse
covariance of complex voltages to identify the operational
lines. In a similar regime, [7], [8] presents greedy schemes
based on trends in second moments of voltage magnitudes to
identify grid topology. [9], [10] utilizes statistical independence tests, in the setting of a graphical model associated
with nodal voltages, to reconstruct topology. A number of data
driven and model-free schemes, using signature and regression
based methods, were developed to reconstruct topology and
line parameters [11]–[13]. In the work [14], most closely
related to this manuscript, an iterative scheme to estimate

topology and line impedances from voltage measurements is
proposed.
A common feature of the aforementioned papers is that
they all rely on availability of nodal measurements (voltage
and/or injection) at all nodes of the grid. Reconstruction in
the case with limited voltage observability as discussed in [7],
[8] require a minimum separation between observed nodes.
Further, [14] proposed an iterative algorithm for topology
estimation with missing nodes, however, it requires to know
the all operational/non-operational line and their impedances.
These assumptions can be easily broken due to non-ubiquitous
presence of nodal meters and lack of historical and stateestimation information. In this manuscript, we overcome these
impediments and suggest an efficient algorithm which estimates jointly operational topology and line impedances.

missing

Figure 1: Illustration of a radial distribution grid with a substation root node. Leaf nodes are observed and colored solid
blue, while unobserved and possibly unknown intermediate
nodes are denoted by dotted blue circles. All operational lines
and their impedances are unknown.

B. Technical Contribution
We develop a provable method/algorithm for topology estimation in the radial distribution grids from samples of nodal
voltage and injection measurements collected from smart meters at the end-user locations. The remaining nodes (including
all intermediate nodes) in the grid may be unobserved, i.e.
their states are unmeasured and further even the knowledge of
their existence and number may be unknown. This represents a
realistic scenario where majority of measurements are limited
to residential devices installed at the end-user locations. Our
reconstruction is model-based. We consider a linearized power
flow model [7], [15]–[17]. Under this model, we develop an
algorithm which first learns the impedance distance between
any two observed nodes in the radial grid. Using these
reconstructed impedance distances, we utilize the recursive
grouping algorithm [18] to learn the operational topology and
associated line impedances. We demonstrate performance of
the algorithm on some useful toy examples and then present
results of experiments based on ac power flows on realistic
IEEE test cases. To the best of our knowledge, this is the
first work which provides guaranteed topology and impedance
reconstruction in the distribution grid where only terminal
nodes are observed.
The rest of the manuscript is organized as follows. Section
II introduces nomenclature and power flow relations in the
distribution grid. Our main algorithm is described in Section
III. Numerical experiments on IEEE test cases are presented
in Section IV. Finally, Section V is reserved for conclusions
and discussion of future work.
II. D ISTRIBUTION G RID AND P OWER F LOW M ODEL
Radial Structure: The distribution grid is defined over graph
G = (V, E), where the set of buses/nodes is denoted by V
and the set of undirected operational lines/edges is denoted
by E. The operational grid is assumed to have ‘radial’ operational structure, that is it forms the forest consisting of
disjoint trees with roots corresponding to substations. Fig 1
shows a disjoint tree part of a radial grid where a red node
represents substation, blue nodes represent leaf nodes and
dotted nodes represent internal nodes. Notationally, we use

alphabets a, b, c, . . . to represent buses/nodes and (ab) stands
for a line/edge between nodes a and b. We denote t ∈ V as
a root node (reference bus). We denote Pab as a unique path
from node a to node b from the same (operational) tree.
Power Flow Models: Given a radial distribution grid on
a tree structured graph G = (V, E), the grid satisfies the
following Kirchhoff’s law of power flow which express the
complex power injection at a node via node-voltages and lineimpedances as follows:
X v 2 − va vb exp(iθa − iθb )
a
.
(1)
pa + iqa =
∗
zab
b:(ab)∈E

In this equation, zab , va , θa , pa , qa denote impedance of (ab) ∈
E, voltage magnitude, voltage phase, active and reactive power
at a ∈ V respectively. The substation/root/reference nodes,
maintained at unit/nominal voltage, are assumed known/fixed.
Since (1) is non-convex, we simplify the model by making
a realistic assumption that the second order terms in (1) is
negligible. Under this assumption, we introduce the linearized
lossless power flow equation describing the linear coupled
power flow (LC-PF) model [7], [14]:
X 

pa =
βab (θa − θb ) + gab (va − vb )
b:(ab)∈E

qa =

X 


βab (va − vb ) − gab (θa − θb )

(2)

b:(ab)∈E
2
2
where gab = rab /(x2ab + rab
), βab = xab /(x2ab + rab
) and
rab , xab are resistance, reactance of line (ab) respectively, i.e.
zab = rab + ixab . By considering only deviations from the
respective steady state reference values, p, q, v, θ are modeled
as random variables with zero mean (counted from the known
reference values). The LC-PF model (2) can also be stated in
the following matrix form [7]
−1
−1
v = H1/r
p + H1/x
q

−1
−1
θ = H1/x
p − H1/r
q

(3)

where v, θ, p, q are respectively vectors of voltage magnitude,
voltage phase, active and reactive power at the non-substation
buses of the grid. H1/r , H1/x represents the reduced weight

Laplacian matrices for G \ {t} where 1/rab , 1/xab are used
edge-weights (ab) respectively.1 We remind that va , θa , pa , qa
are normalized to have zero mean.
III. T OPOLOGY AND I MPEDANCE L EARNING A LGORITHM
In this section, we introduce our main algorithm for learning
topology and impedances. We assume that time-stamped observations of voltage magnitudes, active and reactive injections
at the end-nodes are available to the observer. Our algorithm
is built on the notion of additive ‘distance’ defined as a distance over the graph P
which thus satisfies the weighted metric
property, d(a, b) =
(cd)∈Pab d(c, d). We first estimate the
distance, and then utilize the recursive grouping algorithm [18]
to learn operational topology of the grid. Before introducing
our algorithm, let us make the following assumption about the
missing intermediate nodes.
Assumption 1. All missing intermediate nodes have a degree
at least 3.
We note that Assumption 1 is necessary to recover the true
topology of the grid. See Assumption 2 in [14] for the details.
In addition, we assume that the complex power injections at
different nodes are uncorrelated
Assumption 2. E[pa pb ] = E[qa qb ] = E[pa qb ] = 0 ∀a 6= b.
As considered in prior studies [5], [7], Assumption 2 is welljustified over sufficiently short time intervals while considering
deviations of injections at end-users. Further, for intermediate
nodes that involved in separation of power into downstream
lines and without any major nodal usage, leakage or device
losses cause the net power injection, and hence may be
considered as independent from the rest. Note also that the
Assumption 2 does not specify the class of distributions that
can model individual nodes power injection. It is applicable
when nodal injections are negative (loads), positive (due to
local generation) or are a mixture of both. In a future work,
we will relax this assumption and discuss learning in the
presence of correlated end-user injection profiles that are only
uncorrelated to injections at intermediate nodes.
Now, we refer the following key property of the inverse of a
reduced weight Laplacian matrix which is necessary to define
the grid-based distance metric [7]
X
−1
H1/r
(a, b) =
rcd .
(4)
(cd)∈Pat ∩Pbt

See Section 4 in [7] for details. In (4), Pab is the unique path
from a to b, rab is the resistance of (ab) ∈ E and t is the
root (reference bus) of the grid. One can also derive a similar
−1
formulation for line reactances xab and H1/x
.
Under Assumption 2 and using (3) in the case of observed
nodes a, b, one derives the following identity
−1
−1
E[va pb ] = H1/r
(a, b)E[p2b ] + H1/x
(a, b)E[pb qb ]
−1
−1
E[va qb ] = H1/r
(a, b)E[pb qb ] + H1/x
(a, b)E[qb2 ]
1G

\ {t} denotes a subgraph of G induced by V \ {t}.

(5)

where E[va pb ], E[va qb ], E[p2b ], E[pb qb ], E[qb2 ] are quantities that
can be computed from measurements at observed nodes a
and b. Notice that ability to estimate the expectations in (5)
−1
implies that one can also estimate the value of H1/r
(a, b) and
−1
2
H1/x (a, b) for any observed a, b ∈ V unless E[pb ]E[qb2 ] =
(E[pb qb ])2 . To avoid such pathological situation, we make the
following assumption.
Assumption 3. There exists a constant λ such that for all
node a ∈ V, E[p2a ]E[qa2 ] − (E[pa qa ])2 ≥ λ.
−1
Using the estimated H1/r
(a, b), we can now estimate the
resistance distance (effective resistance) between observed
nodes a, b as
X
−1
−1
−1
dr (a, b) =
rcd = H1/r
(a, a)+H1/r
(b, b)−2H1/r
(a, b)
(cd)∈Pab

(6)
Note that the effective resistance is an additive distance metric
between nodes a and b in the grid. Similarly, one can also estimate the additive reactance distance dx (a, b) between observed
nodes a, b. Once we estimate dr (a, b) for all pairs of observed
nodes, we can utilize the recursive grouping algorithm (RG)
[18] which directly leads us, under Assumption 1, to consistent
topology and impedance estimation of the power grid.
A. Recursive Grouping Algorithm with Exact Distance
The recursive grouping algorithm (RG) is an algorithm
which recovers the true radial topology given any additive
distance d(·, ·) of observed nodes on the tree where it requires
to observe every leaf nodes. Now, we first make the ideal
setting assumption that exact values of d(·, ·) are known for
every pair of observed nodes. We now need to introduce the
following lemma [18].
Lemma 1. For Φabc := d(a, c)−d(b, c), the following relation
holds:
(i) Φabc = d(a, b) for all c ∈ V \ {a, b} if and only if a is a
leaf node and b is its parent.
(ii) −d(a, b) ≤ Φabc = Φabc0 ≤ d(a, b) for all c, c0 ∈ V \
{a, b} if and only if a, b are leaf nodes with common
parent, i.e., they belong to the same group of siblings.
Using Lemma 1 (i), one can figure out the parent-child
relationship for a set of observed nodes O. In addition, Lemma
1 (ii) enables us to find the groups/sets of siblings of O.
Now we are ready to describe how the RG works. The RG
steps are illustrated in Figure 2. The input of RG is a set
of observed nodes O ⊂ V and the additive distance d(a, b)
for all a, b ∈ O. For example, in Figure 2a, green nodes
represent O. First, RG finds groups of siblings and parents
of a node using Lemma 1, also as illustrated in Figure 2b.
After recovering the parent-child, sibling relationships, it adds
edges to all identified parent-child pairs. For siblings without
observed parent, RG adds a new node for a potential parent
and adds edges to the newly added parents and its children.
The procedure is illustrated in Figure 2c. Once nodes/edges
update is done, RG updates the distance d(·, ·) between the

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d)

(e)

(f)

Figure 2: (a) an original topology where skyblue nodes are missing and green nodes are observed (O in Algorithm 1) (b) a
partition Π of O generated by sibling groups and its parent in the first iteration of RG where each set in Π is marked by the
dashed line (c) updated O after the first iteration of RG and a partition Π of O in the second iteration of RG (d) updated O
after the second iteration of RG and a partition Π of O in the third iteration of RG (e) a result after the third iteration of RG
(f) a recovered topology
newly added parents. For siblings a, b ∈ O and their newly
added parent h, the distance d(a, h) is calculated by
1
(d(a, b) + Φabc )
(7)
2
for any c ∈ O. Also, for any c ∈ O, RG also computes d(c, h)
by
d(c, h) = d(a, c) − d(a, h).
(8)
d(a, h) =

Finally, RG updates the set O with (newly added) parents and
nodes which have no (established) relations which requires
to update the parent-child, sibling relationships at the next
iteration of RG. For example, green nodes in Figure 2c is
an updated O. After updating O, RG starts over the whole
procedure anew unless |O| ≤ 2, which implies that we can
add an edge to remaining vertices or only a single vertex
left. Figure 2d-2f illustrates advanced iterations of the RG
(following the first one). Formal description of RG is given in
the Algorithm 1.
Overall, we propose the following two stage algorithm for
topology learning of grids with missing nodes for learning the
topology and impedance of the grid.
1. For all pairs of observed nodes a, b ∈ O, calculate
dr (a, b) and dx (a, b) using (5), (6) and second order
moments.
2. Recover missing nodes and lines using the recursive
grouping algorithm.
The formal statement of the algorithm is presented in Algorithm 2.

Algorithm 1 Recursive Grouping Algorithm (RG)
1:
2:
3:
4:
5:
6:
7:

8:
9:
10:
11:
12:
13:
14:
15:
16:
17:
18:
19:
20:
21:
22:
23:
24:
25:
26:

Input: O, {d(a, b) : a, b ∈ O}
Output: (V, E), {d(a, b) : a, b ∈ V}
Initialization: V = O, E = ∅
while |O| > 2 do
ON EW ← ∅.
Compute Φabc = d(a, c) − d(b, c) for all a, b, c ∈ O.
Find a coarsest partition Π of O such that any two
nodes in S ∈ Π are either leaves and sibling, or a parent
and a leaf child.2
for S ∈ Π do
if |S| = 1 then
ON EW ← ON EW ∪ S.
else if a parent
 pS ∈ S exists then
E ← E ∪ (pS a) : a ∈ S \ {pS }
ON EW ← ON EW ∪ {pS }
else
Add a parent hS of S as follows
V ← V ∪ {hS }
E ← E ∪ (hS a) : a ∈ S \ {hS }
ON EW ← ON EW ∪ {hS }
end if
end for
Update d(·, ·) for ON EW using (7), (8).
O ← ON EW .
end while
if |O| = 2 then
E ← E ∪ {(ab) : a, b ∈ O, a 6= b}
end if

B. Recursive Grouping Algorithm with Samples
In the practical scenario, we can only observe the approximated value dbr of dr calculated from samples rather than
the exact value. Given finite number of samples, the variance
of the distance is nonzero. To account for the variance, we
allow some tolerance ε for finding parent-child and sibling
relationships. In addition, we test the relationship of a, b only
using nodes which are close enough to both a and b, i.e., nodes
in Kab where Kab satisfies

for some constant τ . Let us now present rules which guide the
relationships of nodes using samples.
b abc | ≤ ε for all
(i) Set a as a parent of b if |dbr (a, b) − Φ
c ∈ Kab .
b abc − min Φ
b abc ≤ ε.
(ii) Set a, b as siblings if c∈K
max Φ
c∈K
ab

ab

Kab = {c ∈ O \ {a, b} : dbr (a, c), dbr (b, c) < τ }
2 Π is a coarsest partition if for any Π0 and for any S 0 ∈ Π0 , there exists
S ∈ Π such that S 0 ⊂ S. The coarsest partition Π in Algorithm 1 represents
a collection of sets of siblings and their parent.

One can observe that the newly introduced rules are equivalent
to the RG rules with exact dr (·, ·) except for a tolerance ε.
Update of the distance is done in a similar manner. For a ∈ O

Algorithm 2 Topology/Impedance Learning Algorithm with
Missing Nodes
Input: O, {E[va pb ], E[va qb ], E[p2a ], E[qa2 ], E[pa qa ] : a, b ∈
O}
2: Output: (V, E), {rab , xab : (ab) ∈ E}
3: for "
a, b ∈ O do#

−1 

−1
H1/r
(a, b)
E[p2b ] E[pb qb ]
E[va pb ]
4:
←
−1
E[pb qb ] E[qb2 ]
E[va qb ]
H1/x
(a, b)
1:

8:
9:
10:
11:
12:

correct recovery ratio

13:

end for
for a, b ∈ O do
−1
−1
−1
dr (a, b) ← H1/r
(a, a) + H1/r
(b, b) − 2H1/r
(a, b)
−1
−1
−1
dx (a, b) ← H1/x (a, a) + H1/x (b, b) − 2H1/x
(a, b)
end for
(V, E), {dr (a, b) : a, b ∈ V} ← RG(O, {dr (a, b) : a, b ∈
O})
for (ab) ∈ E do
rab ← dr (a, b), xab ← dx (a, b) where dx (a, b) is
obtained using (V, E)
end for
10%

1
0.8
0.6

eps = 0.05
eps = 0.07
eps = 0.1

impedance error

5:
6:
7:

0.4
0.2

eps = 0.05
eps = 0.07
eps = 0.1

8%
6%
4%
2%
0%

0
1000

2000
5000
10000
number of samples

2000 5000 10000
number of samples

Figure 3: Results for synthetic grids with 100 vertices averaged
over 100 random radial grids. (a) Topology recovery accuracy
(b) realtive impedance error. “eps” in the graphs denotes ε.

IV. E XPERIMENTS
In this section, we present experimental results of our
algorithm on custom and IEEE models.
Tolerance for Experiments: To utilize Algorithm 2 directly,
one should carefully choose the tolerance ε depending on the
number of samples. While small ε results in error as RG would
not update the relationship, loose structure with small number
of missing nodes is estimated if one chooses large ε. Instead
in our experiments, we dynamically change ε in RG, i.e. we
increase ε by ε ← 1.5ε if no relationship is updated while we
reset ε after updating the relationships.
Custom Examples: In each of our simulation runs we construct a random tree with 100 nodes and maximum degree 5.
The line resistance and reactance are independently sampled
from the distribution Unif(0.1, 0.2).3 Complex nodal power
injections are sampled from the independent normal distribution, i.e., pa , qa ∼ N (0, 1). Using the generated complex
power injections, we compute nodal voltage magnitudes and
phases using LC-PF equation (3). The input of the algorithm
is the complex power injections and voltage magnitude of the
leaf/end-user nodes.
Under this setting, we run experiments changing the number
of samples from 1000 to 10000, and also changing tolerance ε.
To quantify performance of our algorithm, we record average
accuracy in the recovered topology and impedances over 100
random radial grids. Figure 3 shows the correct recovery ratio
and the average error in estimating line impedances. The
average error is P
defined for the grid with correct recovery
|rab −r̂ab |
1
ab |
+ |xab|x−x̂
. One observes
according to 2|E|
(ab)∈E
|rab |
ab |
that our algorithm recover line impedances with small error
even in the demanding case of 1000 samples. We also observe
that larger ε results in a higher accuracy for the small number
of samples but it becomes less accurate for the large number
of samples (compare ε = 0.1 to ε = 0.07).

and its newly added parent h, one sets
dbr (a, h) =
1
2(|C(h)| − 1)

X
b∈C(h)\a

X
1
b abc
Φ
dbr (a, b) +
|Kab |

!

c∈Kab

where C(h) denotes the children set of h. Likewise, update of
the distance for c ∈
/ C(h),

X 
1
dbr (c, h) =
dbr (a, c) − dbr (a, h) .
|C(h)|

Figure 4: Illustration of an IEEE radial distribution grid with
33 leaf/end-user nodes and 22 internal nodes.

a∈C(h)

Sample and Computational Complexity: It can be shown
that our algorithm terminates in O(d|V|3 ) steps where d is the
depth of the grid. Further, our algorithm requires (under some
mild assumptions) only O(|V| log |V|) samples to correctly
recover the operational topology and line impedances. The
exact analysis of the complexity results will be provided in
the extended version.

IEEE models: For the more realistic experiments we use a
IEEE model with 56 nodes [17] where the topology was modified (to be radial) and the internal nodes all to be of degree
≥ 3. The modified grid is illustrated in Figure 4. We generate
the complex power injections from the independent normal
distribution as in the case of the custom models. From the
3 Unif(a, b)

is a uniform distribution on an interval [a, b].

complex power injections, we obtain the corresponding voltage
magnitude by using ac power flow solver in MATPOWER
[19]. Under this setting, we measure performance of our
learning algorithm by varying the input number of samples,
the variance of the complex power injection and the tolerance
value, ε. In particular, as a way to quantify errors, we count
the number of edge difference between the recovered topology
and the true topology. We also compare the performance of
our algorithm with MATPOWER samples and LC-PF samples
generated with the same complex power injections. Figure 5
shows our IEEE model experimental results. Observe that the
algorithm works similarly for both MATPOWER samples and
the LC-PF samples. Similar to what we saw in the custom
model experiments, the algorithm performance decreases as
the tolerance ε increases.

number of errors

6

var = 1e-4, eps = 1e-4, MP
var = 1e-4, eps = 1e-4, LC
var = 1e-5, eps = 1e-4, MP
var = 1e-5, eps = 1e-4, LC
var = 1e-6, eps = 1e-4, MP
var = 1e-6, eps = 1e-4, LC

4

2

0
10000

20000 30000 40000
number of samples

number of errors

10

50000

var = 1e-4, eps = 5e-5, MP
var = 1e-4, eps = 1e-4, MP
var = 1e-4, eps = 5e-4, MP
var = 1e-4, eps = 1e-3, MP

8
6
4
2
0
10000

20000 30000 40000
number of samples

50000

Figure 5: Error in estimated topology observed with (a)
changing variance of nodal injections (b) changing “eps” in
algorithm. “var” denotes the variance of the complex power
injections. MP, LC imply that the samples are from MATPOWER and LC-PF respectively.

V. C ONCLUSION
Topology learning of the distribution grids in real time from
sparse data is critically important for a number of operational/control applications. In this manuscript, we propose a
novel algorithm which recovers topology and line impedances
by only using measurements at the end-user nodes. In this approach we utilize LC-PF model to approximate the resistance
distance (also called effective resistance) between any two
observed nodes and apply the recursive grouping algorithm to
recover the topology. Furthermore, our experimental results,

derived for custom (randomized) and IEEE models, shows
that the algorithm performs remarkably well. In the future,
we plan to extend our algorithm to the case of correlated
injections/consumptions and also attempt to generalize to the
case of sparse but loopy operations grids/graphs.
R EFERENCES
[1] R. Hoffman, “Practical state estimation for electric distribution networks,” in IEEE PES Power Systems Conference and Exposition. IEEE,
2006, pp. 510–517.
[2] A. von Meier, D. Culler, A. McEachern, and R. Arghandeh, “Microsynchrophasors for distribution systems,” Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference (ISGT), 2014 IEEE PES, pp. 1–5, 2014.
[3] Z. Zhong, C. Xu, B. J. Billian, L. Zhang, S.-J. S. Tsai, R. W.
Conners, V. A. Centeno, A. G. Phadke, and Y. Liu, “Power system
frequency monitoring network (fnet) implementation,” Power Systems,
IEEE Transactions on, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 1914–1921, 2005.
[4] R. Sevlian and R. Rajagopal, “Feeder topology identification,” arXiv
preprint arXiv:1503.07224, 2015.
[5] S. Bolognani, N. Bof, D. Michelotti, R. Muraro, and L. Schenato, “Identification of power distribution network topology via voltage correlation
analysis,” in Decision and Control (CDC), 2013 IEEE 52nd Annual
Conference on. IEEE, 2013, pp. 1659–1664.
[6] D. Deka, M.Chertkov, S. Talukdar, and M. V. Salapaka, “Topology
estimation in bulk power grids: Theoretical guarantees and limits,” in
accepted in the Bulk Power Systems Dynamics and Control SymposiumIREP, 2017.
[7] D. Deka, M. Chertkov, and S. Backhaus, “Structure learning in power
distribution networks,” IEEE Transactions on Control of Network Systems, 2017.
[8] D. Deka, S. Backhaus, and M. Chertkov, “Learning topology of the
power distribution grid with and without missing data,” in Control
Conference (ECC), 2016 European. IEEE, 2016, pp. 313–320.
[9] ——, “Estimating distribution grid topologies: A graphical learning
based approach,” in Power Systems Computation Conference (PSCC),
2016. IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–7.
[10] Y. Liao, Y. Weng, G. Liu, and R. Rajagopal, “Urban distribution grid
topology estimation via group lasso,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1611.01845,
2016.
[11] G. Cavraro, R. Arghandeh, A. von Meier, and K. Poolla, “Data-driven
approach for distribution network topology detection,” arXiv preprint
arXiv:1504.00724, 2015.
[12] V. Arya, T. Jayram, S. Pal, and S. Kalyanaraman, “Inferring connectivity
model from meter measurements in distribution networks,” in Proceedings of the fourth international conference on Future energy systems.
ACM, 2013, pp. 173–182.
[13] J. Peppanen, J. Grimaldo, M. J. Reno, S. Grijalva, and R. G. Harley, “Increasing distribution system model accuracy with extensive deployment
of smart meters,” in PES General Meeting— Conference & Exposition,
2014 IEEE. IEEE, 2014, pp. 1–5.
[14] D. Deka, S. Backhaus, and M. Chertkov, “Learning topology of
distribution grids using only terminal node measurements,” in IEEE
Smartgridcomm, 2016.
[15] M. Baran and F. Wu, “Optimal sizing of capacitors placed on a radial
distribution system,” Power Delivery, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 4,
no. 1, pp. 735–743, Jan 1989.
[16] ——, “Optimal capacitor placement on radial distribution systems,”
Power Delivery, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 725–734, Jan
1989.
[17] S. Bolognani and S. Zampieri, “On the existence and linear approximation of the power flow solution in power distribution networks,” Power
Systems, IEEE Transactions on, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 163–172, 2016.
[18] M. J. Choi, V. Y. Tan, A. Anandkumar, and A. S. Willsky, “Learning latent tree graphical models,” The Journal of Machine Learning Research,
vol. 12, pp. 1771–1812, 2011.
[19] R. D. Zimmerman, C. E. Murillo-Sánchez, and R. J. Thomas, “Matpower: Steady-state operations, planning, and analysis tools for power
systems research and education,” IEEE Transactions on power systems,
vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 12–19, 2011.

