Next Article in Journal
A Greenhouse Profitability Model: The Effect of the Energy System
Next Article in Special Issue
Smart Grid Systems: Addressing Privacy Threats, Security Vulnerabilities, and Demand–Supply Balance (A Review)
Previous Article in Journal
Optimized Operation Strategy for Multi-Regional Integrated Energy Systems Based on a Bilevel Stackelberg Game Framework
Previous Article in Special Issue
Towards Net Zero in Poland: A Novel Approach to Power Grid Balance with Centralized Hydrogen Production Units
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Enhancing Smart Grid Security and Efficiency: AI, Energy Routing, and T&D Innovations (A Review)

School of Information and Control Engineering, Southwest University of Science and Technology, Mianyang 621000, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Energies 2025, 18(17), 4747; https://doi.org/10.3390/en18174747
Submission received: 7 August 2025 / Revised: 23 August 2025 / Accepted: 25 August 2025 / Published: 5 September 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Smart Grid and Energy Storage)

Abstract

This paper presents an in-depth review of cybersecurity challenges and advanced solutions in modern power-generation systems, with particular emphasis on smart grids. It examines vulnerabilities in devices such as smart meters (SMs), Phasor Measurement Units (PMUs), and Remote Terminal Units (RTUs) to cyberattacks, including False Data Injection Attacks (FDIAs), Denial of Service (DoS), and Replay Attacks (RAs). The study evaluates cutting-edge detection and mitigation techniques, such as Cluster Partition, Fuzzy Broad Learning System (CP-BLS), multimodal deep learning, and autoencoder models, achieving detection accuracies of (up to 99.99%) for FDIA identification. It explores critical aspects of power generation, including resource assessment, environmental and climatic factors, policy and regulatory frameworks, grid and storage integration, and geopolitical and social dimensions. The paper also addresses the transmission and distribution (T&D) system, emphasizing the role of smart-grid technologies and advanced energy-routing strategies that leverage Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs), Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs), and game-theoretic approaches to optimize energy flows and enhance grid stability. Future research directions include high-resolution forecasting, adaptive optimization, and the integration of quantum–AI methods to improve scalability, reliability, and resilience.

1. Introduction

The global energy landscape is undergoing a significant transformation, driven by the urgent need to mitigate climate change and facilitate the transition to sustainable energy systems. Renewable energy sources, such as solar photovoltaics and wind turbines, are increasingly being integrated into smart grids to reduce carbon emissions and dependence on fossil fuels. However, the intermittent nature of these resources poses challenges for grid reliability, stability, and cybersecurity, exposing to vulnerabilities such as False Data Injection Attacks (FDIA) and Denial of Service (DoS) attacks.
Improving the functionality and adaptability of smart grids is increasingly reliant on artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML). The paper briefly describes advanced models such as the Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) network, the Random Forest (RF) model, and the autoencoder, among others, which have been applied in demand prediction, pattern detection, and anomaly detection in energy systems. Specifically, LSTM and Gated Recurrent Units (GRUs) do not suffer from the vanishing gradient problem, which supports their application in smart grid for tasks such as load-profile analysis and energy-routing optimization. Moreover, the Self-Organizing Maps (SOMs) can be employed to identify anomalies in consumer-load patterns and irregular sensor records, which may indicate equipment malfunctions, including defects or FDIA-related cyberattacks. These AI-based technologies enhance grid intelligence and adaptability, enabling real-time decision-making and effective use of resources to meet the demands of dynamic energy requirements.
In addition, the increasing digitalization of smart grids presents cybersecurity challenges, whereby smart meters (SMs), Phasor Measurement Units (PMUs), and Remote Terminal Units (RTUs) are vulnerable to cyber intrusions targeting their control. In this regard, this paper identifies and discusses the application of advanced solutions, such as the Cluster Partition–Fuzzy Broad Learning System (CP-FBLS) and multimodal deep learning, for the immediate and swift response to FDIA and DoS attacks in power-generation systems. The methods exploit neural network topologies as well as decentralized control and ensure effective resource management at high performance levels. The threat of the Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs), which can cripple grid functionality and cause cascading failures, is also addressed in this review study. This paper further notes that secure and locally resilient architectures are critical in safeguarding critical energy infrastructures against emerging cyberattacks, through the exploration of not only the frameworks but also the overall effects of integrating grid-level architectures into motion-control strategies that mitigate the degradation of resilient consensus.
Renewable energy intermittency and the resulting requirements to manage it pose significant demands for energy-storage systems (ESSs) and comprehensive policy frameworks necessary to support the sustainability of power systems. The paper also discusses hybrid energy-storage systems (HESSs), which consist of a combination of mechanical, electrochemical, and thermal storage technologies to improve grid stability and efficiency. The co-optimization models reviewed have reduced transmission expansion requirements by nearly 10%, thus cutting infrastructure costs and enhancing grid reliability. Moreover, the research highlights the role of policy instruments in overcoming the challenges of political opposition, financial limitations, and social acceptance. Combining econometric modeling, policy studies, and AI-driven optimization methods, the work offers a comprehensive framework for developing scalable, secure, and sustainable energy chains, capable of meeting the increasing global energy demand and ensuring environmental protection and system stability.
The smart-grid technologies, such as energy management systems (EMSs) and Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI), further enhance the efficiency of energy networks. EMS provides real-time visibility and control over grid operations as well as optimization, and AMI allows demand-side management based on consumption profiles derived in real time from consumption data. The paper also discusses energy routing, incorporating AI-based solutions and multi-agent systems (MASs) as approaches enabling decentralized control and peer-to-peer scheduling to enhance resilience. Nonetheless, these technologies face challenges such as heavy computational burdens and scalability limitations, underscoring the importance of future research into hybrid protocols that integrate metaheuristics, AI, and blockchain to create secure and flexible energy networks. By examining these developments in detail, this study contributes to the ongoing discourse on power system transformation, aiming to achieve sustainability, security, and efficiency in response to evolving energy needs.
This review aims to provide a holistic security and efficiency analysis for modern smart grids based on an extensive literature review, as presented in Figure 1. While existing surveys often treat cybersecurity and renewable integration in isolation, this work synthesizes these domains to highlight their interplay. Furthermore, it addresses a significant gap in the literature by dedicating substantial focus to energy-routing protocols, a strategic decision-making layer essential for managing power flow in decentralized, renewable-heavy grids. By evaluating AI, metaheuristic, and multi-agent systems for routing optimization, this review offers a distinct perspective on achieving grid resilience, going beyond conventional discussions to address the core operational challenge of future energy networks.

2. Energy Generation

2.1. Factors Impacting Energy Generation

The generation of energy is influenced by a combination of physical, technological, environmental, and socio-political factors. Understanding these factors is essential for planning sustainable and efficient energy systems. The key factors that shape energy generation include (1) resource availability, which determines the type and reliability of energy that can be produced; (2) technological efficiency, which affects how effectively these resources are converted into usable energy; (3) environmental and climatic conditions, which influence the performance and stability of generation systems; (4) policy and regulatory frameworks, which provide guidelines and incentives for energy production; (5) grid and storage integration, which is crucial for balancing supply and demand in real time; and (6) geopolitical and social factors, which affect energy security, market stability, and public acceptance. Each of these dimensions plays a critical role in shaping both the current and future landscape of energy generation.
The availability of resources is fundamental in determining the viability, productivity, and feasibility of generating energy. In recent years, advancements in forecasting models, geospatial analysis tools, and hybrid system design have significantly improved our ability to evaluate and utilize energy resources such as solar irradiance, wind potential, and hydropower capacity. The following are some of the most powerful contributions in this field.
One example is the study [1] which contributed by presenting a GIS-based multi-criteria decision analysis framework employing the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) for solar site selection. The proposed approach integrates satellite-based solar irradiance data, topography-related parameters, land-use/-cover maps and accessibility measures to generate spatial suitability maps. In this case, the method was applied in semi-arid area to select the best location for photovoltaic (PV) deployment. The major contribution of the study lies in providing a solution for policy planners and investors, enabling them to use the method to identify high potential zones with consideration of environmental, technical, and infrastructural bottlenecks using data.
Another potential work is by [2], whose method predicted the long-term dynamic of available resources using the Earth System Models (ESMs). The authors compared climatic projections of potential solar and wind energy using multi-model collections of climatic change scenarios. They determined that, despite the predicted growth in the total amount of worldwide renewable resource potential, there will be a reduction in reliability, due to increased variability and significant occurrences in certain regions. The analysis is of great significance to future energy planning, as it indicates the need to incorporate the results of climate forecasts into plans for implementing renewables to avoid over-projecting the consistency of resources in the future.
Ref. [3] presented a comprehensive study on the use of Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) in hybriding wind and solar energy by retrieving real-time meteorology information. The authors focused their attention on the development of a predictive model that can suggest the availability of solar radiation and wind speed to enable hybrid renewable systems at a single moment. The model was applied to adjusted forecast data from 2022 for weather and energy generation, and its performance was evaluated using standard metrics of a forecast such as the RMSE and MAE. The usefulness of the paper is enormous, as the framework was practically applied in locations where solar and wind resources were available but differed in abundance depending on weather conditions. This combined forecasting approach considers both the advantage of maximising generation efficiency and improving the planning of grid connection for hybrid systems.
Similarly, among the more recent publications, Ref. [4] integrated numerical weather prediction (NWP) models with ANNs during data training to improve the accuracy of solar irradiance forecasting. When their hybrid scheme relied on a regional collection of solar radiation observation data and high-resolution weather forecasts, significant gains in forecast accuracy were achieved over individual models. This study is crucial for solar energy systems, as accurate forecasting allows operators to optimize power generation, storage, and dispatch strategies in advance, thereby minimizing curtailment and improving system reliability.
Finally, Ref. [5] addressed a persistent challenge in the field the lack of open, high-resolution operational data by publishing a large-scale empirical dataset collected from six operational wind and solar farms in China. The dataset includes synchronized SCADA measurements, environmental conditions, and real-time power output data over two years. This openly available dataset enables researchers to validate forecasting and optimization models against real-world generation conditions. By filling a critical data gap, this study strengthens the foundation for empirical resource analysis and model development in renewable energy systems.
Table 1 presents a summary of these works along with their model deployment and main contributions.

2.1.1. Technological Efficiency

Technological efficiency is crucial for optimizing energy systems, reducing costs, and enhancing sustainability. Recent advancements in computational models, machine learning (ML), and deep learning (DL) have significantly improved the efficiency of power generation from conventional plants to renewable sources. These technologies enable accurate performance forecasting, real-time optimization, and waste reduction, thereby lowering the Levelized Cost of Energy (LCoE).
For example, a study by [6] proposed hybrid ML/DL models, including XGBoost, CatBoost, LightGBM, and LSTM, to predict solar and wind power generation. Their parallel fusion approach reduced the average forecast error to 8.02%, demonstrating that combining multiple algorithms can optimize energy management and enhance prediction accuracy for variable renewable energy sources. Another study by [7] reviewed the application of AI-driven optimization techniques, such as genetic algorithms, surrogate modeling, and Bayesian optimization, in offshore wind-turbine tower design. This study emphasized that these AI tools can optimize structural design to reduce costs and improve efficiency, ultimately lowering the LCoE for offshore wind systems. In [8], the authors applied thermodynamic cycle analysis to combined cycle power plants (CCPPs). This study demonstrated that optimizing operational settings based on real plant and environmental data could significant improve efficiency, achieving a 1.8% increase in thermal efficiency, which enhances overall plant performance.
Additionally, Ref. [9] proposed a digital-twin solution for floating offshore wind turbines, specifically for the TetraSpar prototype. By integrating real-time SCADA data with aerodynamic estimations and physics-based modeling, their approach enabled improved performance monitoring and load forecasting, thereby enhancing both turbine efficiency and reliability. Similarly, the authors of [10] introduced physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) for wind-turbine power forecasting, embedding physical laws within the model architecture. This integration led to highly accurate predictions, with a Mean Absolute Error (MAE) of 3.9%, which is critical for providing reliable power-generation forecasts during real-time operations. Table 2 presents a summary of these studies and their performance metrics.

2.1.2. Environmental and Climatic Conditions

Environmental and climatic conditions play a pivotal role in the efficiency, reliability, and sustainability of power-generation systems. Recent studies have highlighted how factors such as extreme weather events, temperature variations, and hydrological changes can directly affect the performance of both renewable and conventional energy sources.
For example, a study by [11] proposed a systematic framework to assess the impact of extreme summer droughts on power-generation capacity in the U.S. power grid. This study, which focused on the PJM and SERC regions, showed that during severe drought conditions, the usable capacity of hydroelectric and thermal power plants could decrease by 19–29%. These findings underscore the vulnerability of power systems to prolonged dry periods, particularly in regions dependent on hydro generation, where reduced water flow can significantly impair energy output. The study provides critical insights into planning and mitigation strategies for climate-induced disruptions in power generation.
A study by [9] examined the resilience of the Italian power system to extreme weather events such as heatwaves and cold spells. The study revealed that extreme weather conditions could severely disrupt thermal generation and hydropower systems, highlighting the increasing need for solar and wind energy integration. It is projected that Italy’s power system would require an additional 5–8 GW of PV capacity by 2030 to meet renewable energy targets and mitigate the effects of extreme weather. The findings emphasize the need for adaptation strategies in energy infrastructure, especially in Mediterranean regions where climate change is expected to increase the frequency and intensity of heatwaves.
Further expanding on the role of extreme weather, Ref. [12] introduced a novel method to identify weather-induced extreme events in highly renewable energy systems. By analyzing electricity shadow prices from a European power system model based on 40 years of reanalysis data, they identified key weather patterns that lead to system stress. Their findings showed that multi-day weather events, rather than single weather shocks, were the primary cause of renewable energy shortages during extreme conditions. This study calls for interdisciplinary collaboration between energy meteorology and system modeling to better prepare for such events.
Another study, also by [11], examined how extreme summer droughts impact the eastern U.S. power system, particularly in the PJM and SERC regions. By using capacity derating models, the authors simulated the effects of prolonged droughts on both hydroelectric and thermal power generation. This study found that during periods of severe drought, power plants in these regions could experience up to a 29% reduction in usable capacity, potentially leading to power shortages. The research provides actionable insights for energy planners to develop strategies that mitigate the risk of power-generation losses during drought conditions.
Similarly, Ref. [13] explored how climate change impacts the adequacy of Europe’s power system. Their study focused on temperature variations and hydrological changes, examining how these factors could alter electricity demand and hydropower generation in the future. By modifying inputs to a large-scale electricity market model, they found that while climate change may reduce winter heating demand; this decrease would likely be offset by increased challenges related to hydrological variability. These findings suggest that future energy planning must account for the dual impact of climate change in terms of both reduced demand and increased supply risks from hydropower. Table 3 summarizes the relevant studies on environmental and climatic conditions.
In addition to environmental effects, the emergence of renewable energy sources (RES) significantly changes the energy system in terms of the cybersecurity system resilience. This transformation has a two-fold impact. On the one hand, it widens the attack surface. The network configuration composed of arrays of solar inverters, wind-farm controllers, and related sensors is a distributed system containing multiple entry points under of cyberattacks. They tend to be in a more weakened security than conventional utility assets, leaving them susceptible to attacks such as False Data Injection Attacks (FDIA) which can hack into the generation forecast or inverter parameters and short-circuit the system. Moreover, the intrinsic variability of RES can be exploited by attackers to conceal their operations, further complicating defense mechanisms. Conversely, resilience can enhanced through a diversified, decentralized system where the RES are properly integrated. Such a grid would be less susceptible to attacks targeting single points of failure by reducing dependence on large centralized generation centers. If one components of the renewable fleet is affected, others will be able to operate. This is the benefit of resilience. However, this advantage depends on the enactment of strong cybersecurity levels such as the AI-driven detection methods mentioned in this review on all the tier levels of the distributed system to ensure that the new complexity as a result of the introduction of RES is secured.

2.1.3. Policy and Regulatory Framework

The policy and regulatory framework plays a crucial role in power-generation systems, particularly in the context of the transition to renewable energy and the need for energy security in the face of climate change. These frameworks influence how energy is generated, distributed, and consumed, impacting both conventional power plants and renewable energy systems. Recent studies have explored how policy instruments, regulatory measures, and financial incentives affect the efficiency, reliability, and sustainability of power generation, with a focus on renewable energy adoption, emissions reductions, and energy security.
In a study by [14,15,16] the authors assessed the effects of four major climate and energy policies: carbon taxes, emissions trading systems (ETS), renewable energy standards, and energy-efficiency programs on CO2 emissions from electricity generation. Using econometric models, the researcher were able to determine how each of the policies impacted the reduction of emissions in the power-generation industry. It is noteworthy that, as the authors reported, a combination of these policies proved to be significantly more productive than relying on any single one, much of what was required of power-generation systems that needed to decrease emissions, alongside securing reliability and coping with the growing consumer energy demand. As this work indicates, harmonizing various policy tools can help develop a more integrated framework aimed at advancing clean energy production and addressing grid stability and capacity in a more balanced manner.
Another study examined the impact of climate laws implemented in countries on energy security performance (ESP) [17]. The analysis was targeted at the positive outcomes of properly developed climate policies, i.e., the possibility to enhance the energy security due to the diversification of the energy resources supplies more resilience of the systems. These consistent energy security policies aligned and corresponding to one another in terms of energy security targets are bound to create a sustainable economy of power-generation systems that can sustain power-generation performance even in the face of environmental pressures. The paper points out that all these policies only work depending on the design and implementation of the policies, in addition to the broader political and economic context. Regulations promoting clean energy production and grid stability are a necessity in an attempt to expand power-generating capabilities and reduce vulnerability to the challenges of climate upheaval.
Similarly, Ref. [18] conceptualized the influence of financial and political aspects in the passage of climate bills that will enable the migration toward renewable energy systems. These led to the identification of the most important policy instruments, i.e., subsidies, tax incentives and renewable energy targets which have been effective in delivering renewable energy technologies, thus facilitating the shift toward more sustainable forms of power generation. Yet, barriers to policy implementation, as highlighted in the study, were found to be quite challenging, such as political resistance, economic restrictions, and social acceptability. This research stipulates that a multi-faceted policy, which involves not only subsidizing but also establishing robust regulatory procedures, is required to provide a shifting, as well as efficient, method for transitioning the energy-generation sector to renewable energies.
The Inter-American Development Bank examined the regulations and policy design in a report [19] on how to assist renewable energy in Latin America and the Caribbean. The report highlighted the significance of transparent and sound regulatory frameworks in the attraction of private investment in its renewable energy scheme, which is crucial for boosting the production of solar, wind, and hydropower resources. Public–private partnership (PPP) was presented as the effective step in scaling renewable energy projects especially in those areas that have not fully realized their potential of renewable energies. The paper emphasizes the significance of capacity building to the regulatory entities in order to allow for successful policy implementation and sustainability to renewable energy production over the long run.
The literature depicts that, for the future of power generation, policy and regulatory frameworks are essential. Renewable energy technologies can be integrated into energy-generation processes, advancing the energy-generation systems with the help of effective climate policies, financial instruments, and regulatory frameworks. The effectiveness of these policies, however, depends on how they are determined and enacted, as well as in tandem with the overall objectives of energy security and policy sustainability. Looking at the future, there is a need to have a holistic and all-encompassing policy strategy that makes it possible to have an easy and sustainable switch to clean energy creation.
For this purpose, to make a regulatory strategies paractically relevent, researchers have also explored interdisciplinary approaches. For example, authors in [20] proposed advanced econometric frameworks that allow for the quantitative assessment of carbon tax effectiveness and policy synergies in achieving energy resilience and emission reduction. Similarly, in the SG environments, multi-agent system (MAS) simulations have emerged as a powerful tool, where autonomous agents represent utilities, policy stakeholders, and consumers. The MAS-based framework of study [21] supports collaborative decision-making under regulatory uncertainty. Integrating such interdisciplinary tools provided a better way of response among stakeholders and more robust insights into policy, which ultimately leading to more effective and adaptive energy governance.

2.1.4. Grid and Storage Integration

A power grid that incorporates energy-storage systems (ESS) has now been identified as one of the essential approaches for developing the reliability, flexibility, and resilience of current power-generation systems. With the increasing presence of RES, including solar power and wind power, the intermittency of RES presents major problems when it comes to ensuring grid stability. Energy-storage technologies provide beneficial solutionsby storing energy when there is excess supply and supplying it when needed most or when there is a shortage in energy supply. This is achieved through the capability to match the supply and demand aspects required to make sure of a consistent power provision. High supply and demand, ensure a stable power supply.
The development of hybrid energy-storage systems (HESS) is one of the most significant evolutions in energy storage. These systems combine several different storage technologies to leverage their features. A paper by [22] provides an extensive overview of HESS, including their structures, planning decisions, and control measures. The study highlighted the finding that the optimal design of storage technology selection and operation under a hybrid system can have a significant impact on improving grid performance and stability. Through the combination of different storage technologies, HESS emerges as an economical and adaptable mechanism to address the drawbacks of renewable energy intermittency, optimizing electric systems as a whole. This review emphasize that the hybrid storage systems have to be optimized further in order to enable more sustainable balance between industry generation and demand on the grid.
Table 4 presents the comparative analysis of the studies relevant to policy and regulatory framework.
Further expanding on the integration of storage with grid systems study [23] demonstrated the value of co-optimizing the sizing of wind, solar, storage, and grid connection capacity. By employing a co-optimization model, the study found that integrating energy storage could significantly reduce the need for extensive transmission expansion, which is often required to handle growing renewable energy generation. The researchers found that co-optimizing storage and transmission planning could decrease the need for transmission expansion by around 10%, thereby lowering infrastructure costs while enhancing the efficiency and stability of the power grid. This strategy highlights how storage systems can help alleviate congestion in the grid, providing more flexibility and reliability for integrating renewables. The study underscores the economic benefits of integrating storage solutions into grid planning to optimize both energy-generation and transmission.
Long-Duration Energy Storage (LDES) has become one of the potential technologies to provide long-term solutions to grid stability. In [24,25], the authors compared the possibilities of LDES as contributing to grid operations, specifically, in reducing curtailment and increasing flexibility in operations. The researchers investigated the energy capacity requirements of LDES with respect to the benefits that would be gained in terms of electricity price setting and the achievement of decarbonization targets. The researchers discovered that LDES systems may provide seasonal energy balance, which is highly needed to support grids that rely on variable injections such as wind or solar energy. LDES has the potential to become a key element in green transition due to its ability to offer sustainable energy storage on a large scale over time, making the grid flexible enough to operate effectively in the future.
In an attempt to achieve optimal performance and ensure the longevity of energy-storage systems, as explored in [26], this article presents a novel algorithm for weather-driven priority charging. This algorithm, incorporates the real-time weather forecasting and monitoring to enables optimal charging of batteries and energy-storage systems. Using weather information, the algorithm will be able to take advantage of times when there is an oversupply of renewable energy whilst ensuring that practices of inefficient charging do not wear down the storage systems. The approach enhances the reliability and efficiency of the hybrid renewable power grids, making it an important solution to integrating the storage system effectively with the power grid. The researchers have demonstrated the way smart charging solutions can optimize energy consumption, extend battery life, and stabilize the grid. Universal charging support: The analysis emphasizes how universal charging, capable of supporting energy storage, can optimize energy use, increase battery life, and balance the grid.
Lastly, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) documented that grid-scale battery storage is growing rapidly in the United States, with the storage capacity set to rise to 30.9 GW by the end of 2024. The rise is fueled by declining battery prices, favorable governments policies and overcoming the issue of grid reliability. Large-scale battery-storage systems are gaining importance to help curb the problem posed by the growing proportion of renewable energy sources. Batteries enable the storage of surplus generated during off-peak power and also provide flexibility to release offering a stable and flexible alternative to managing renewable energy. The addition of grid-scale storage will be essential in enhancing the resilience and stability of the grid as it becomes increasingly reliant on intermittent renewable sources of energy [27]. Table 5 summarizes the few studies relevant to grid and storage integration.

2.1.5. Geopolitical and Social Factors

Geopolitical tensions and societal dynamics significantly shape the production, distribution, and adoption of power-generation systems worldwide. Recent studies reveal how national security concerns, global conflicts, public sentiment, and regulatory environments influence the path and pace of energy transitions.
A study by [28] empirically confirmed that geopolitical risks hinder energy transitions by increasing supply-chain volatility and price fluctuations. However, countries with robust regulatory frameworks and well-developed renewable industries were shown to weather these disruptions better and accelerate renewable energy deployment, reinforcing the role of resilient policy design in sustaining clean power generation.
A Germany-focused case study [29] analyzed the Energiewende, highlighting how Germany’s strong political commitment to green policies has reshaped its energy mix. The research showed that national strategies balancing energy security, economic competitiveness, and diplomatic alignment led to the increased deployment of renewables. However, it also emphasized the delicate balancing act required to manage energy independence, affordability, and international cooperation.
On the social acceptance front, Ref. [30] applied machine learning (ML) to Twitter data to assess public sentiment toward wind energy in Norway. The study found an increases in negative public viewpoints during 2018–2020, demonstrating how local social opposition can impede project rollout and delay infrastructure development. This highlights the need for early engagement and transparent communication in planning renewable generation projects.
Similarly, Ref. [31] explored the geoeconomics of renewable energy, using game-theoretic models to show how countries like China strategically leverage investment, trade ties, and global policy cooperation to secure technological leadership in clean energy markets. The study concluded that geopolitical competition can drive innovation and efficiency in power generation, provided that international coordination and balanced policy frameworks are maintained.
Some researchers have also explored ML–based sentiment analysis, enabling policymakers to respond and monitor public opinion more effectively. For example, a study by [32] implemented RoBERT, a transformer-based language model, to analyse over 266,000 tweets about solar energy in the U.S., revealing temporal and regional variations in sentiment that were related to policy support. Sentiment analysis approaches guide the optimal placement of energy storage, public attitudes in real-time, grid infrastructure, or renewable installations, especially in socially sensitive areas. Similarly, authors in [33] conducted a thorough review of sentiment analysis techniques and highlighted how real-time public feedback, gathered through platforms like Twitter, guides more inclusive and socially accepted transitions toward sustainable energy systems.
Table 6 summarizes the studies’ focus on geopolitical and social factors.

2.2. Impact of Cyber Attacks on Power Generation and Detection Using ML and DL Techniques

The increasing integration of digital technologies in modern power-generation systems has significantly improved operational efficiency but has also exposed these critical infrastructures to a wide range of cyber threats. As power generation forms the backbone of national energy security, any successful cyber intrusion, particularly in the form of False Data Injection (FDI), Denial of Service (DoS), or control signal manipulation, can lead to catastrophic instability and widespread outages. This growing concern has driven the research community to explore intelligent, data-driven solutions for intrusion detection and mitigation.
In this context, ML and deep learning (DL) models have emerged as powerful tools for detecting, classifying, and responding to cyber attacks within the power-generation domain. For example, a study by [34] compares k-means clustering, Auto Encoders (AE), and Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) on IEEE-68 bus simulations. The GNN model demonstrated superior performance in detecting and localizing False Data Injection Attacks (FDIAs), achieving accuracy exceeding 95%. Similarly, Ref. [35] leveraged Principal Component Analysis (PCA)-enhanced DL models on Phasor Measurement Unit (PMU) time-series data and integrated them with decision trees to distinguish between disturbances and cyber attacks in smart power systems.
Another study by [36] applied supervised ML models, including Support Vector Machine (SVM), K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN), and Artificial Neural Network (ANN), along with heuristic feature selectors on IEEE 14/57/118 bus systems. The study highlighted that optimal feature selection improves FDIA detection accuracy, with the SVM model achieving the highest accuracy of 90% with 122 selected features. In the realm of reinforcement learning, a Deep Q-Network (DQN)-based cybersecurity assessment framework was introduced by [37], which effectively identified and scored attack strategies in wind-integrated grids, outperforming conventional graph-search methods.
The vulnerability of ML models to adversarial attacks was addressed by [38], demonstrating how inputs generated using the Jacobian Saliency Map Algorithm (JSMA) can bypass RF and J48 Intrusion Detection System (IDS) models. Adversarial training was shown to restore and even enhance model robustness. Complementing this, the authors of [39] proposed stacked Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) + Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) architectures, which significantly improved detection accuracy in Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems due to ensemble-style learning.
The authors of [40] comprehensively highlight recent DL frameworks across Industrial Control Systems (ICS), including power-generation environments. The authors identify the need for scalable and real-time defenses tailored to grid characteristics. Methodologically structured guides, such as [41], help formalize a 6-step DL pipeline for cyber–physical system (CPS) security, tested on public CPS datasets. To improve resilience against adversarial noise, Ref. [42] proposed stacked DL architectures (StackMean, StackMax, StackRF) enhanced with Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique (SMOTE). Their approach demonstrated improved detection in Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) environments. However, the authors of [43] warned that AE-based models remain susceptible to evasive attacks, suggesting model-level defenses. Exploring hybrid GNN Deep Neural Network (DNN) designs, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) proposed a state-prediction framework combining LSTM with GNN to detect FDIAs based on prediction errors in IEEE-39 bus systems [44]. Meanwhile, the authors of [45] proposed a streaming ensemble learner for real-time FDIA classification on live PMU data, showcasing adaptability to evolving grid threats. In [46], the authors proposed PowerFDNet, a spatiotemporal DL model combining CNN and GNN modules. Tested on IEEE-118 and Alternating Current (AC)-model grids, it effectively detected stealthy attacks and proved efficient for edge deployment. To reduce false alarms, an eigenvalue-residual similarity method (MERS) was applied by [47] on IEEE-39 buses, achieving over 96% accuracy.
Other anomaly-based methods include an AE approach by [48] on IEEE-118, which trains on known-good data and detects deviations via reconstruction errors. In [49], the authors applied Graph Signal Processing (GSP) to spatial grid data, detecting anomalies through k-means clustering of graph features. Similarly, transfer learning has also emerged as a promising strategy. The authors of [50] trained models on IEEE-14/118 and fine-tuned them on real-world data to improve detection in the presence of model uncertainty. Similarly, the authors of [51] proposed a graphical FDIA detector combining temporal and topological features in IEEE-39 systems. Adversarial simulation methods, such as Multi-Agent Adversarial Reinforcement Learning (MARL), were explored by [52], where agents learned attack and defense policies on inverter-rich grids.
Additionally, [53] presented Moving Target Defense (MTD) enhanced DNNs, which use randomized network topology to resist adversarial inputs across IEEE bus systems. In renewable-heavy environments, deep generative methods have been utilized. Ref. [54] combined denoising AE and Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) to detect FDIAs under load-forecasting applications, maintaining 98% accuracy. Conditional GANs were also used in state estimation models in [55], achieving a success rate of 96%. Another study [55] proposed a state-space decomposition method using Sliding-Mode Observers (SMO) and H-resilient control to mitigate FDIA in Load Frequency Control (LFC) systems, reducing the impact of control-versus-measurement attacks and improving frequency response accuracy. To address unsupervised FDIA detection, [56] integrated LSTM and adversarial AE on IEEE-13/123 bus systems, yielding robust detection in unbalanced distributed energy networks without labeled anomaly data.
Building upon Load Frequency Control (LFC) security, the authors of [57] proposed a multi-model fusion framework that combines LSTM and AE to detect FDIAs and load-switching anomalies. The proposed model achieves 99.4% accuracy, detecting threats within 0.12 s on average. Meanwhile, a study by [58] introduced a federated LSTM-graph convolutional networks (GCN) detection system for distributed FDIA localization across IEEE-57/118/300 buses, balancing accuracy with data privacy. To address hybrid cyber–physical threats, Ref. [59] applied random matrix theory (RMT) and a singular value decomposition (SVD-CNN) classifier to identify and localize replay and FDIA attacks on IEEE-14 and IEEE-57 systems.
Expanding on control-layer resilience under cyber threats, Ref. [60] introduced a Load Frequency Control mechanism using off-the-shelf redundant communication channels, equipped with a QoS-dependent event-triggered communication (QEC) scheme. This approach maintains system stability and control accuracy even in the presence of FDIA-induced communication degradation by dynamically adjusting packet rates based on network conditions, ensuring both robust performance and efficient resource use. Another study [61] introduced a Cluster Partition–Fuzzy Broad Learning System (CP-FBLS) framework that partitions attack clusters, achieving ultra-fast FDIA detection in real-time generation networks while maintaining high classification precision.
These studies collectively reveal how ML and DL techniques have been innovatively applied to detect, localize, and mitigate cyberattacks across power-generation infrastructures. From traditional supervised learning to advanced spatiotemporal models, the literature underscores a growing trend toward hybrid, privacy-preserving, and adversarially resilient architectures. Each study contributes to addressing the multifaceted challenge of ensuring secure and stable power generation in increasingly digitized grids. Table 7 provides a comparative analysis of several studies addressing cyberattacks on power generation.

3. Transmission and Distribution (T&D) System of Power Grid

In a traditional power grid, power flows in one direction from the utility through transmission and distribution systems to consumers. This one-way flow is a key component of traditional grid architecture, where centralized monitoring is essential to balance generation with consumer demand while respecting system limitations [64]. Utility operators manage every stage of the process to ensure both reliability and financial sustainability. However, the rapid growth in electricity demand from new devices, notably electric vehicles (EVs), has introduced vulnerabilities in traditional grids, including losses, limited monitoring and communication, poor distribution routes, and a lack of advanced automation and digital technologies [65,66].
To address these limitations and make the grid system more reliable, the smart grid has been introduced. By integrating technologies like the Internet of Things (IoT), modern digital technology, and automation, the smart grid facilitates two-way communication and allows electricity to flow in both directions [67]. These advancements enhance the monitoring of electricity transmission and distribution, support the seamless integration of electricity sources, and enable real-time monitoring and immediate response to disruptions, making the grid system more reliable and efficient. Smart-grid technology is better equipped to handle energy demands and operational issues in real time [68].
However, smart grids have complex architecture, which makes it more challenging to maintain effective power quality when dealing with a variety of load types. It is more difficult to maintain voltage stability, control harmonic distortion, and prevent other quality concerns when the network faces issues caused by diverse devices and generating sources [69].
Advanced, AI-powered grid interfaces are becoming essential tools for real-time control and adaptability [70,71]. AI-enhanced power quality-monitoring devices predict and mitigate future issues while also addressing current abnormalities. They achieve this by monitoring system conditions [72], forecasting disruptions, and automatically modifying operating conditions. This proactive approach support future innovations like direct-current distribution networks [73], which might further reduce power delivery issues in data centers, homes, and renewable energy agriculture. This enhances the functionality of connected equipment while encouraging safer, more efficient grid operation.
While integrating these IoT and modern digital techniques introduces challenges and safety risks like cyber threats, power outages, and blackouts [74], an overview of the smart grid is presented in Figure 2. To address these problems, much research has been conducted in recent years.
Utkarsh et al. [75] introduced a Self-Organizing Map (SOM) method for resilience assessment and restoration control in a distribution system during severe events. The study proposes a temporal resilience index to support resource allocation and operational dispatch. The proposed SomRes framework detects weak states and promotes pre-emptive load shedding, thereby improving coordination of T&D system responses during contingencies.
A fuzzy SOM-based third-party approach for electricity distribution networks was presented by Ovidiu Ivanov. Under an affinity control policy, consumer classification through load-profile shapes was performed for the rapid development of a Typical Load Profiles (TLPs) database, which is essential for effective T&D planning. The approach demonstrated good strength and stability of segmentation under load.
Wu et al. [76] proposed Gridtopo-GAN, a GAN-based method which uses topology-preserved node embeddings to correctly identify meshed and radial patterns in large-scale networks and performs effectively on both IEEE benchmark systems and real-world networks.
Yan et al. [77] proposed UG-GAN, a model that synthesizes three-phase unbalanced distribution systems. By observing real network random walks, it emulates local structures and enriches the synthetic grids with realistic nodal demands and components. UG-GAN was tested on smart meter data to balance data privacy and structural realism.
Venkatraman et al. [78] developed a CoTDS model with static/induction loads, reactive shunts, and DG inverters. The PI control and small-signal model serve as the foundation for analyzing mutual influences between the T&D systems. Simulations highlight the necessity of coordinated grid control under high DG penetration.
Mohammadabadi et al. [79] introduced a GenAI-based communication model that employs pre-trained CNNs to generate synthetic time-series data. Local agents process the data, reducing transmission load and preserving privacy. This method supports scalable, distributed learning for tasks such as anomaly detection and energy optimization in smart grids.
Shankar et al. [80] developed a deep learning OPA (dLOPA) model based on LSTM for smart-grid contingency analysis. It incorporates a pre-processing step that improves training efficiency, achieving 93% accuracy while maintaining low false-positive and false-negative rates. The dLOPA model does not target T&D systems specifically but contributes to the reliability of the grid.
Gonzalez et al. [81] introduced an RNN approach for demand prediction in distribution network planning. By incorporating confidence intervals, the model successfully respects explicit transformer thermal boundaries and enhances planning when accounting for load variations and distributed generation.
Shrestha et al. [58] proposed a federated learning LSTM-AE model for anomaly detection. The model achieved a 99% F1-score, maintained privacy, and outperformed conventional techniques.
Liu et al. [82] introduced MDRAE, an attention-based autoencoder for missing data recovery in transmission and distribution systems, that outperformed comparison models and enhanced both data quality and grid stability.
Raghuvamsi et al. [83] proposed a TCDAE for topology detection in distribution systems with missing measurements that outperformed other types of DAE variants.
Li et al. [84] proposed GTCA, a mixed T&D contingency analysis application that integrates the Global Power Flow and DC models. The approach is more effective than traditional methods, especially for looped networks.

3.1. Important Factors of Transmission & Distribution (T&D) System

There are several important factors of the T&D system in the smart grid, which are presented in Figure 3.

3.2. Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI)

AMI is an advanced digital system that automatically measures energy consumption in real time [85]. In contrast, traditional metering relies on analog devices requiring manual readings. AMI enables two-way communication between consumers and prosumers, providing accurate consumption monitoring and billing based on exact energy usage. This technology also facilitates demand response programs and allows consumers to track their real-time energy usage, helping them to reduce consumption during peak hours and optimize costs [86].

3.2.1. Communication Networks

Communication networks enable frequent status checks, the sharing of data, and two-way communication to enable accurate T&D data which, in consideration of smart-grid networks, requires a high level of security. With constant monitoring, prosumers can track grid status and identify potential problems that might occur in order to enhance distribution of energy properly. It is also remotely managed through automated control systems that operates electronic devices such as routers and electric vehicles. This enhances the efficiency of transfer data and communication channels between prosumers and consumers more efficiently [87].

3.2.2. Distributed Energy Resources (DER)

Distributed energy resources (DER) include facilities located closer to consumption points than conventional generation facilities. These systems comprise small energy sources like solar arrays, batteries, wind generators, and electric cars that produce and store energy close to the households and enterprise premises. Implementing DER on the smart grid increases reliability and flexibility while reducing dependences on conventional power plants. Moreover, DER expands the utilization of green energy and reduces carbon emission. Moreover, self-sufficient energy systems, known as microgrids, can operate independently and control multiple processes with the smart grids [88,89].

3.3. Energy Management Systems (EMS)

An energy management system (EMS) is a computer-based system designed to monitor, manage, and optimize the operations of the smart power grid. It also assists utilities in generating, distributing, and managing electricity consumption in real time [90]. The overall goal of EMS is to enhance grid stability through effective management of the power resources, energy supplies, and loss as well as enhance efficiency in general. Information collected by EMS in actual time varies in different sectors of the smart-grid tools in order to carry out functions such as forecasting about the energy consumption and regulation of the amount of needed power. Machine learning methods are also applied in EMS to increase system performance, enhance prediction accuracy, and enable autonomous systems to work [91,92].

Grid Security

Grid security aims to protect the smart-grid infrastructure from cyberattacks, which can disrupt operations and cause major losses, such as data theft. To prevent such disruptions, smart grids employ security systems that ensure secure and reliable operation [93]. Cyberattacks primarily target smart grid-connected systems containing critical information. To prevent these attacks, grid security employs powerful encryption, secure authentication methods, and real-time monitoring for immediate threat identification and prevention. In addition, grids implement physical safeguards, such as fences, cameras, and guards, to prevent unauthorized physical access that could lead to equipment damage or cyber intrusions [94,95].

3.4. Detecting Methods

To ensure grid security and sustainability, several detection methods have been proposed in the literature, as summarized in Table 8.

3.4.1. Optimization Models

Optimization models are mathematical and computational tools used to enhance the performance and efficiency of electricity transmission and distribution. These models allow smart-grid systems to make intelligent decisions and determine the optimal operational strategy in various scenarios. They also help reduce energy loss and improve real-time efficiency. Recent investigations demonstrate that these approaches are effective in both simulations and real-world situations [115].
Barajas et al. [116] introduced optimization models to enhance the generation, transmission, and distribution of electricity in a microscopic system using the energy hub concept. The first linear programming model addressed hourly operations, while a mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) model was applied for 24 h planning with 21,773 constraints. Results from Mexico’s national grid show that the integrated-cycle plant generates 50% of power, while the hydroelectric plant provides 18%. The proposed model achieved a 30% energy objective using the existing architecture, demonstrating its suitability for large-scale energy management.
Tianqi et al. [117] introduced an optimization model for smart-grid investment planning during T&D tariff reform. The proposed model integrates indices for planning efficiency and benefits, while also considering constraints from previous projects and the relative significance of different projects. A risk index model was additionally developed to address the uncertainty that can affect planning decisions. The results show that the proposed models outperform traditional models by effectively responding to changing user load profiles under peak–valley time-of-use pricing schemes and enhancing planning efficiency.
In their study, Ogbogu et al. [118] used an optimal power-flow model to reduce investment costs, transmission losses, and maintenance requirements, as well as optimize power distribution. The proposed model is subject to constraints, such as generator power limits, bus voltages, transformer tap applications, and transmission line capability. These limitations are determined by the physical and operational principles of the power system.

3.4.2. Numerical Methods

Numerical models refer to mathematical tools that deal with physical systems by dexterously representing a system with numbers and an algorithm to simulate and analyze real-life problems. These models are critical for monitoring, planning, and optimization in the system of transmission and distribution. They are perfectly applicable in the calculation of solutions, more so in complex systems beyond the scope of analytical or manual calculation methods [119].Bragin et al. [120] proposed a surrogate Lagrangian relaxation (SLR) model to address the same issue in the smart grid by solving the coordinated operation of the entire T&D system. Such work aims to improve the efficiency of operationsand resource utilization. Convergence is compared with conventional methods like the sub-gradient model, where the results indicate that the model is effective and gives an added advantage to the previously available methods in enhancing the coordinated decision making.
A model where the electricity market equilibrium was presented as a transmission and distribution system in the work of Saukh et al. [121], using electricity circuit theory, Kirchhoff’s laws, and a quadratic loss function. By using the measurement factor, this technique assists in making a more realistic simulation of the market and efficiently.
An OpenDSS model of the smart-grid planning using GIS data and CIM files was developed by Cordova et al. [122]. This strategy can achieve better results of simulating and enhancing decision-making within the distribution system, thus supporting effective open-source smart-grid planning.
Moradi et al. [123] proposed a coordinated mechanism of improving the performance of the T&D power system in smart-grid networks. The approach uses a mathematical step-by-step model, which considers grid risks that include the varying electricity demand, production, and behavior of electric vehicles. The proposed model is employed in battery storage, wind farms, switchable feeders, distributed generation and demand–response programs. There are also EV charging stations across different grid levels to cope with short-term uncertainty. The efficiency of the model was validated using with the IEEE RTS and test feeder of 33 nodes, validating the test experiment.

3.4.3. Artificial Intelligence Model (AI)

AI-based models are computer programs that use data for classification, prediction, and pattern recognition, encompassing a wide range of methods, such as Machine Learning (ML), Deep Learning (DL), data mining, evolutionary computation, and fuzzy logic [124]. One of the most well-known subsets of AI is ML, which focuses on identifying patterns in large datasets [125]. ML analyzes input features to develop a model that can be used for tasks like prediction, classification, and clustering.
There are three main categories of ML: Supervised Learning [126], Unsupervised Learning [127], and Reinforcement Learning (RL) [128]. Supervised learning models are trained on labeled datasets with known input–output pairs. The aim of supervised learning is to build a model that can accurately map the input to output. Common models include linear regression, Support Vector Machines, and Random Forests.
In contrast, unsupervised learning is used for unlabeled data. The primary objective is to identify hidden patterns and structures within the data. This method is primarily used for clustering and pattern recognition with the help of models like k-means and autoencoders.
Reinforcement learning uses a goal-driven approach where agents learn by interacting with the environment to optimize long-term cumulative rewards based on prior experience. A key principle of this learning method is the Markov Decision Process (MDP), which helps the agent determine the most effective policy. RL also identifies and manages the trade-off between exploration (trying new actions to discover outcomes) and exploitation (using known-good actions).

3.4.4. Random Forest (RF)

RF is an ML model used for prediction, which enhances accuracy, performance, and model stability by integrating the outputs of multiple decision trees [129]. RF commonly employs historical data from sensors, SCADA systems, and meteorological input to forecast a range of operational parameters. RF is also known for its ability to manage high-dimensional, nonlinear datasets that are typical of complex grid operations, and its resilience to overfitting, making it essential for applications such as load forecasting, fault detection, and optimizing power flow within smart grids [130,131].

3.4.5. Support Vector Machine (SVM)

SVM is a supervised learning method used for complex tasks such as classification and regression [132]. To address these two functions, it is defined as either Support Vector Regression (SVR) for continuous value prediction or Support Vector Classification (SVC) for classification.
SVR is used to predict continuous values. The primary objective of SVR is to identify a hyperplane that accurately fits the training data, while minimizing the error for data points that fall outside a predefined margin of tolerance [133,134].

3.4.6. XGBoost

Extreme Gradient Boosting, or XGBoost, is a powerful technique for building predictive models. The process entails sequentially adding decision trees, where each new tree corrects the errors of its predecessors. It uses internal regularization controls to prevent over-complexity and thus reduces the risk of overfitting. Due to its speed and accuracy, XGBoost is a popular tool in a variety of fields. It is designed to process big data quickly and efficiently by performing several tasks in parallel. Because of these benefits, it is commonly used to predict energy consumption, identify equipment anomalies, and detect abnormal trends in modern power-grid systems for energy distribution and delivery [135].

3.4.7. Artificial Neural Network (ANN)

ANNs are computational networks modeled after the human brain [136] and are composed of hierarchies of interconnected neurons. Each neuron performs a weighted summation of its inputs, followed by an activation function [137].

3.4.8. Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM)

Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) networks are a variant of Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) designed to capture long-term dependencies to address the vanishing gradient problem. LSTMs also incorporate memory cells and a gating mechanism comprising an input gate, a forget gate, and an output gate to control the flow of information [138].
LSTMs are deployed in smart-grid transmission and distribution systems, where they have been applied to load forecasting, anomaly detection, and identifying cyberattacks. This is because they can effectively model temporal dependencies within time-series data from sensors and meters. This capability enables earlier detection of errors or attacks, enhancing grid stability and security [139,140].

3.4.9. Convolutional Neural Network (CNN)

CNNs are a type of deep learning model designed to capture spatial and temporal features hierarchies from input data. In smart-grid transmission and distribution, CNNs are used to identify anomalies, cyberattacks, and system faults using real-time data streaming from devices such as Phasor Measurement Units (PMUs), Remote Terminal Units (RTUs), and smart meters. The building block of a CNN is the convolutional layer, which applies learned filters to the input data to extract informative features [141].
In the context of the smart grid, CNNs are fundamental to many applications. They enhance cybersecurity by identifying anomalies resulting from infiltrations such as False Data Injection Attacks (FDIA), Denial of Service (DoS), and Load Redistribution Attacks. They also support in fault diagnosis by detecting and localizing line faults, transformer failures, and voltage instability. Finally, they enhance short-term load forecasting by learning temporal patterns from historical data [142]. CNNs play an essential role in improving the efficiency, reliability, and robustness of smart-grid T&D networks, as they can automatically extract spatial–temporal dependencies.

3.4.10. Recurrent Neural Network (RNN)

Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) are deep learning models used to process time-series and sequential data. For smart-grid transmission and distribution systems, RNNs are useful in applications with time-dependent characteristics, such as load forecasting, anomaly detection, and state estimation. Unlike feedforward networks, RNNs do not maintain a separate representation for time steps; instead, information persists through repeating loops of weights [140].
Due to their ability to model temporal dynamics, RNNs are suitable for forecasting future power load based on historical data. They can also detect patterns that indicate imminent failure or identify anomalies (e.g., cyberattacks like FDIA and DoS attacks) [143]. For fault diagnosis, RNNs can process voltage and current waveforms to detect abnormalities by comparing them with normal behavioral trends. In cybersecurity, the RNN can examine communication or measurement sequences for unusual patterns.
RNN-based algorithms also have potential for load forecasting, as they can extract daily and seasonal variations, thus supporting utilities in generation and distribution planning. More advanced versions, such as LSTM and GRUs, overcome shortcomings caused by the vanishing gradients problem, making RNNs more useful for smart-grid applications [144]. Overall, RNNs play an important role in enhancing the intelligence, adaptivity, and security of smart-grid operations.

3.4.11. Autoencoder Models

Autoencoders are unsupervised neural network architectures that learn compressed representation of the input data. They are consist of two parts: the encoder, which compresses the input into a latent-space representation, and the decoder, which reconstructs the input from this representation. The purpose of the autoencoder is to reconstruct the input as accurately as possible, with the latent space capturing the most salient features of the data [145].
In smart-grid transmission and distribution systems, autoencoders can be used for anomaly detection, fault diagnosis, and data denoising. As an inherent feature of their learning process, autoencoders that have been trained on non-anomalous operational data are highly sensitive to deviations that result from False Data Injection Attacks (FDIA), Load Redistribution Attacks, and sensor failures [146]. By examining the reconstruction error, the model can determine when a data point is not consistent with the expected norm. For instance, a sudden voltage collapse or abnormal load generation can be flagged as suspicious if the reconstruction loss exceeds a predefined threshold.
Autoencoders can also be employed for dimensionality reduction of high-dimensional observations from multiple smart-grid sensors, retaining the most relevant features for use as input for forecasting or classification. Furthermore, models such as sparse autoencoders, denoising autoencoders, and variational autoencoders (VAEs) enhance performance through improved feature extraction, noise robustness, and probabilistic interpretation [147]. In this context, autoencoders represent a valuable tool for the reliable identification of disturbances and efficient representation of data, thus contributing to the security, resilience, and efficiency of smart-grid systems.

3.4.12. Self-Organizing Map (SOM)

The self-organizing map (SOM) is an unsupervised neural network model suggested by Teuvo Kohonen, known for clustering and visualizing high-dimensional data by projecting it into a lower-dimensional grid (usually 2D) [148].
In smart-grid transmission and distribution systems, SOMs are especially beneficial for load profiling, anomaly detection, consumer behavior analysis, and fault-type detection. The SOM is consists of neurons in a 2D lattice, each of which is linked to a weight vector of the same size as the input [149,150]. During training, the SOM undergoes competitive learning, reorganizing itself so that similar input patterns will activate neurons that are nearby each other on the map.
In the context of the smart grid, SOMs are employed to identify patterns in consumer-load profiles to group similar consumption behavior and assist with demand-side management. They can also detect abnormal sensor or measurement data that could signal a failure or equipment defect. In addition, SOMs can help classify power quality events (PQEs) or cluster different parts of a network according to their operation [151]. As SOMs can be trained in an unsupervised manner, they are well-suited for situations where data labeling is costly or impossible. Ultimately, SOMs enhance smart-grid operations, imparting the abilities of pattern discovery, anomaly detection, and dataset visualization.

3.4.13. Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs)

Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs), a family of deep learning models proposed in 2014 by Ian Goodfellow, operate on a generate-and-test basis. A GAN consists of two neural networks: a generator, tasked with producing synthetic data that appears realistic, and a discriminator, which acts as a classifier to determine whether the data is realistic or unrealistic [152,153]. The generator strives to produce more realistic data to deceive the discriminator, while the discriminator works to improve its classification accuracy. With each iteration, the generator gets better at deceiving the discriminator, and over time, it produces high-quality synthetic data that closely matches the real data distribution.
With regard to smart-grid transmission and distribution systems, GANs have several impactful applications. They can be used for data augmentation, particularly in datasets with imbalanced representation where incidents like cyberattacks (e.g., False Data Injection Attacks, DoS) are rare. By creating synthetic data of these rare incidents, GANs enhance the effectiveness of classifiers trained to detect them.
GANs are also used for anomaly detection, where they learn the characteristics of normal operational data and flag data points with high discriminator loss as anomalies. Additionally, GANs can enable privacy-preserving grid data sharing, enabling secure risk-sharing partnerships among utilities. In predictive maintenance, GANs can be used to model the effects of hypothetical fault conditions and overloads under future operating conditions [154]. Other variants, such as Conditional GANs (CGANs) and Wasserstein GANs (WGANs), improve training stability and enable conditional generation based on labels like grid zones, time windows, or attack types. In general, GANs can make the grid smarter and more secure by promoting realistic simulation, data augmentation, and anomaly detection in complex T&D networks [155].

3.5. Hybrid Models

The methodology in [156] employs multivariable regression methods, including linear, polynomial, and exponential regressions, for predicting peak loads. When these models were applied to Jordan’s electricity grid, achieved an accuracy of nearly 90%, with a performance comparable to regular exponential regression techniques. As discussed in [157], the aim is to examine issues of power consumption at the national level through active long-term demand forecasting for a deregulated electricity market. The study also underlines the importance of activities like energy procurement, infrastructure expansion, and contract management.
[158] highlight a deficiency in prior research regarding hybrid deep learning. They note that limited work has explored combine multiple deep learning structures for large-scale smart-grid load forecasting. According to their findings, combining models improves predictive accuracy and provides insights into the relationships between various models and complex data patterns. In [159], a hybrid algorithm was proposed that combines evolutionary deep learning with LSTM and a genetic algorithm to optimize parameters as lag windows and the number of neurons. This mixed method proved more accurate and flexible than traditional forecasting methods.
In [160], the authors examined two recurrent neural network sequence-to-sequence (S2S) implementations to predict building-level energy consumption using GRU and LSTM layers. They also compared these hybrid models with five conventional forecasting techniques: multiple linear regression, stochastic time-series analysis, exponential smoothing, Kalman filtering, and state-space modeling, using an identical dataset for the comparison. An LSTM-based approach proposed by Yong et al. [161] was specifically designed to forecast the same-day energy demand of buildings.

3.6. Cyberattacks in Transmission and Distribution

Cyberattacks are malicious activities designed to damage networks, steal data, and disrupt normal processes in the smart grid. Their primary goal is to compromise transmission and distribution, potentially leading to blackouts and physical damage. Several types of cyberattacks target T&D systems, with each having unique features and potential outcomes. For instance, a Man-in-the-Middle (MiTM) attack targets communication between two devices or users. Similarly, Replay Attacks (RA) and Time Synchronization Attacks (TSA) can replay or alter measurement data and signals.
TSA and False Data Injection Attacks (FDIA) are designed to manipulate smart meter readings in order to manipulate state estimation and evade bad-data detection systems. Additionally, Denial of Service (DoS) attacks prevent information from reaching its intended destination. Countermeasures are introduced to detect these attacks, protect the grid, and prioritize cybersecurity efforts and resources. Some of these cyberattacks pose a greater threat than others due to their potential impact on grid stability and security [162]. Table 9 provides a comparative analysis of several studies focusing on cyberattacks in T&D.

3.6.1. Man-in-the-Middle Attack (MiTM)

A Man-in-the-Middle (MiTM) attack occurs when an attacker intercepts communication between two parties or devices and impersonates one of them, making it seem as though the information is being transmitted normally [173]. Kulkarni et al. [174] investigated the potential security threats related to MiTM attacks in power systems, focusing on vulnerabilities in the Modbus TCP/IP protocol used for communication.
Fritz et al. [175] developed a prototype of a MiTM attack on a smart-grid emulation platform. The authors also demonstrated a technique for compromising the integrity and validity of IEEE Synchrophasor protocol packets. Detecting packet interception is difficult because of the physical distance between the PMU and the Phasor Data Concentrator (PDC). Additionally, the PDC acquires data with minimal time for encryption, authentication, and integrity testing.

3.6.2. Replay Attack (RA) and Time-Delay Attack (TDA)

Accurate timing of control signals is essential for maintaining proper system operation. Time-Delay Attacks (TDAs) compromise this by introducing random delays in data transmission and reception, which can disrupt timing-dependent control components [175]. In contrast, Replay Attacks (R) are used to capture sensor measurements over a set period and then replace real-time data with these previous measurements. Additionally, they may involve retransmitting past recorded control signals from the operator to the actuator [176,177]. These two attacks use legitimate past data to manipulate system behavior, resulting in a system state that differs from the intended scenario. This can lead to major outages by disrupting and damaging the power grid [178].

3.6.3. False Data Injection Attack (FDIA)

Smart grids represent a radical departure from conventional electrical networks, aiming to promote interconnection among operators, suppliers, and users to create a tightly linked environment. This greater interconnection introduces significant challenges, particularly concerning consumer data privacy and the safe operation of the grid. A major concern is the vulnerability of real-time system operations, including generator synchrophasormeasurements, to cyber threats like FDIAs.
FDIAs pose a significant threat to smart-grid cybersecurity. First proposed by Liu et al. [179], compromises the state estimation (SE) process at the control center by injecting false values into measurement data. Although bad-data detection (BDD) tools, which use the l2-norm, are employed to identify inconsistencies, it is possible to design attack strategies that manipulate these systems. By injecting errors stealthily, attackers can bypass the BDD tools.
The FDIA is a hidden attack due to the subtle modification of the attack vector in the measurement data. Attackers are typically modeled as either requiring knowledge of the grid topology to launch an attack (FC-attackers) relying solely on observed data without topology information. FDIA behavior is also affected by application-specific vulnerabilities. For example, open communication links make Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) more susceptible. In power systems, attacks are more difficult to execute because of the complexity of modeling real grid parameters. Attackers may conduct broad or targeted attacks depending on their objectives and the available system information. Crucially, these attacks may threaten the integrity, availability, or confidentiality of the system. One example is providing false meter readings, which can lead to incorrect system operation, service outages, and private customer data leakage, as recorded in the AMI [180].

3.6.4. Load Redistribution Attack (LRA)

LRA is a type of FDIA attack proposed by Yuan et al. [181] and collaborators, which aims to disrupt the operation of the power system by targeting the Economic Dispatch (ED) process. ED aims to minimize generation costs and optimize power distribution to meet load demands. When LRA manipulates the estimated system state, it can lead to incorrect ED decisions, resulting in grid instable and inefficiency.
LRA has two primary objectives: immediate effects or delayed effects. The immediate effect aims to significantly increase the operating cost right after the attack. In contrast, the delayed effect aims to gradually overload power lines, which can ultimately cause physical damage to the power grid.

3.6.5. Denial of Service (DoS)

In the smart grid, there are numerous measurement devices, such as smart meters (SMs), data aggregators, Phasor Measurement Units (PMUs), Remote Terminal Units (RTUs), Intelligent Electronic Devices (IEDs), and Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs). These devices exhibit vulnerabilities that can be exploited for Denial of Service (DoS) attacks.
A DoS attack in a power system makes measurement data unavailable to both users and the control system, disrupting communication and causing network instability. The attack also hinders the smart-grid ability to capture events during its occurrence. A DoS attack can be caused by flooding a device or communication channel with high volumes of data or exploiting system weaknesses such as jamming or routing vulnerabilities [182,183,184]. A puppet attack is a newer form of DoS attack that blocks communication in the Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) network [185]. The attacker selects normal nodes to send attack data. When those nodes receive the data, the attacker continues to send more, overloading the system and blocking communication.

4. Energy Utilization

The objectives of energy T&D models are to effectively transfer energy from generation plants to consumers. Energy utilization has become a critical concern due to the pressing need to reduce consumption, combat climate change, and enhance the sustainability of energy systems. While the oil and gas industry has long driven global economic growth, the increasing link between national economies and global energy demands necessitates maximizing energy efficiency to harmonize economic growth with environmental protection. Buildings, which account for about 34% of global energy consumption and carbon emissions, are a major source of energy use and therefore a priority for efficiency enhancement, as discussed in [186]. This specific study, however, did not use a dedicated model to examine energy utilization. In contrast, studies by [187,188] used optimization models to quantify the impacts of energy use and its utilization.
Conventional building energy management strategies have traditionally been based on fixed power grids and conventional energy systems, which are often inefficient, costly, and environmentally harmful [189,190,191,192]. Over the last few years, there has increasingly shifted toward smarter energy management systems through the integration of renewable energy sources (RES) into built environments [193,194,195,196]. These systems, which include solar photovoltaic (PV) systems, wind turbines (WTs), and energy-storage systems (ESS), aim to reduce dependence on the grid, lower energy costs, and minimize building’s carbon footprints [197,198,199].
The concept of energy utilization optimization in buildings encompasses a diverse range of strategies, including demand-side management (DSM), smart grids, energy storage, and real-time monitoring of consumption patterns [200,201,202,203,204]. These studies highlight that optimization techniques such as genetic algorithms and demand-side strategies are pivotal in addressing the dynamic challenges of balancing energy supply and demand, managing uncertainty, and coordinating resources. The ability to track energy utilization in real time enables adaptive building operations to optimize energy use, minimize losses, and coordinate consumption with periods of high renewable energy production [205,206,207]. These studies also emphasize the evolution of solar technologies, from first-generation silicon-based cells to advanced PV/T and quantum dot cells, aiming for improved efficiency and lower costs. Such developments, supported by policy incentives and innovation, are critical for maximizing solar energy utilization and achieving global decarbonization goals.
With increasing urgency in energy conservation efforts, the advantages of combining smart meters with building energy management systems (BEMS) are abundant [191,208]. These systems can automate energy optimization processes, respond to changes in energy generation, and enhance overall efficiency. Smart meters facilitate flexible pricing, enable effective peak demand management, and improve grid stability. They also empower occupants to monitor and control their energy usage. At the same time, rapid cost reductions in solar, wind, and battery-storage technologies, along with climate policies and carbon pricing, have accelerated a global shift toward electricity-dominated energy systems [209,210]. Recent research on wind energy emphasizes the optimization of turbine performance, control systems, and offshore infrastructure to enhance efficiency, reliability, and integration into future hydrogen economies and applications.
This section discusses the importance of smart meters in maximizing energy utilization in buildings, exploring how they increase energy efficiency, decrease operational expenses, and facilitate the integration of renewable sources. By investigating new developments and trends in smart meter technology, this section provides a comprehensive overview of how these systems transform energy use in the built environment and contribute to the broader goal of sustainability. Figure 4 provides a complete overview of energy utilization in the smart grid.

4.1. Technologies for Energy Utilization in Smart Grid

The integration of smart grids has transformed energy systems by introducing advanced technologies designed to enhance efficiency, reliability, and sustainability in energy use. For example, policy-driven demand-side management in industrial sectors further improves energy efficiency and support broader sustainability goals [68,211]. Smart grids are characterized by their ability to provide real-time monitoring, data analytics, and automated control, which collectively enable better energy management and optimization. As discussed by [212,213], demand-side management plays a pivotal role in enhancing energy efficiency, reducing emissions, and facilitating smart-grid integration through optimized consumption strategies and the use of hybrid algorithms.
Several major technologies are key to the effective operation of smart grids [214,215,216]. These include renewable energy integration, Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI), advances in energy-storage technologies, and demand-side management tools. The key technologies that enable optimal energy use within smart grids and how they affect efficient grid operation are presented in Table 10.

4.1.1. Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI)

Smart grids rely on Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI), which is an integrated system of smart meters, communication networks, and data management platfoms. AMI systems gather real-time data on energy usage, voltage, and power quality for analysis and monitoring by utilities. AMI systems support self-configuration, algorithm integration, and scalable deployment, paving the way for intelligent energy market participation and system resilience [215,217].
These systems also enable utilities to monitor energy consumption in detail, providing valuable insights into usage patterns. AMI helps facilities gather real-time energy usage data, enabling instant access for both consumers and utilities. Furthermore, AMI facilitates two-way communication that supports remote meter control and troubleshooting for both consumers and utilities. Table 11 presents a comparative analysis of several studies and their key findings.

4.1.2. Renewable Energy Integration

Smart grids are crucial for integrating renewable energy systems, such as solar photovoltaics (PV), wind turbines (WTs), and hydropower, to overcome the constraints of conventional fossil-fuel-based energy systems. Advanced optimization techniques and smart-grid technologies are key to managing renewable variability and ensuring reliable, efficient, and sustainable energy supply [222,223].
Integrating a large number of renewable energy sources into the grid introduces variability and uncertainty. Smart grids handle this through advanced forecasting, energy storage, and demand–response techniques. The integration of PVs and electric vehicles (EVs) requires coordinated operation models and simulation-based techniques to mitigate grid instability, optimize load scheduling, and reduce energy costs. In parallel, modern power systems leverage AI, machine learning, and dynamic modeling to enhance grid resilience, enabling real-time control and supporting the seamless integration of renewable energy sources [224,225]. Moreover, intelligent grids allow for the efficient use of distributed energy resources (DERs), including rooftop solar panels and small-scale wind turbines, to provide local energy. Smart grids also employ weather forecasting, data mining, and machine learning to predict the availability of renewable energy, thereby streamlining grid operations, especially during periods of fluctuating energy production [226,227].
Table 12 presents a comparative analysis of several studies, highlighting their limitations.

4.1.3. Energy-Storage Systems (ESS)

One of the key elements of smart grids is the energy-storage systems (ESS), which includes batteries and pumped hydro storage facilities. These systems store energy surpluses generated by renewable sources during periods of high production and release them during times of low generation to maintain the balance between supply and demand [233]. Accurate load forecasting using advanced deep learning models, such as the IntDEM framework, enables optimized charging and discharging schedules for ESS in IoT-enabled smart grids [234].
ESS ensures grid stability by storing energy during low-demand periods and discharging it during peak demand, thus preventing blackouts and maintaining a constant supply. By discharging stored energy during peak load periods, ESS helps reduce the need for costly peaking power plants and reduce electricity prices [235]. An integrated demand–response framework that combines medium-term forecasting and an optimized battery ESS can reduce costs and emissions while improving energy efficiency [236]. Furthermore, ESS enables greater integration of intermittent renewable energy sources by compensating for fluctuations in generation, thereby ensuring a continuous and reliable energy supply.
The following Table 13 compares several studies in the domain of energy utilization by highlighting their key findings and limitations.

4.1.4. Demand-Side Management (DSM)

Demand-side management (DSM) refers to strategies employed to influence consumers’ energy usage in order to improve efficiency and reduce grid stress. DSM systems enable utilities to actively manage consumption patterns through incentives, dynamic pricing, and direct control of appliances. For instance, one study used conceptual frameworks like intersectionality and social license to examine social barriers to DSM adoption, while another employed statistical and machine learning models to optimize DSM implementation through dynamic pricing and load-control strategies [242,243].
Smart grids enable dynamic pricing schemes that encourage the use of energy during off-peak periods, thereby reducing peak load demand and promoting a more balanced energy distribution [244]. Furthermore, appliances equipped with smart technologies, such as smart thermostats, washing machines, and refrigerators, can be controlled remotely to optimize energy consumption based on grid conditions and pricing signals. The key findings and limitations of several previous studies are presented in Table 14.

4.1.5. Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning

Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) play an increasingly important role in smart-grid technology by enabling advanced analytics, real-time decision-making, and optimization. For example, an AI-driven framework using Deep Reinforcement Learning, blockchain, and federated learning has demonstrated enhance virtual power plant and smart-grid performance by optimizing renewable integration and ensuring secure, scalable operation [250,251].
ML algorithms can predict energy demand patterns, renewable energy generation, and potential faults in the grid, thereby allowing for proactive management and reduced downtime. Furthermore, AI-powered systems optimize energy dispatch from various resources, including renewable energy, storage, and conventional power plants, ensuring the most efficient and cost-effective energy mix. AI algorithms can analyze sensor data to detect anomalies, predict equipment failures, and initiate preventive maintenance, thereby improving grid reliability [252].
A comparison of several studies highlights the importance of AI in the energy system, as presented in Table 15.

4.2. Cyber Attacks on Energy Utilization in Smart Grids

The integration of advanced technologies in smart grids has clearly transformed energy management into a more efficient, sustainable, and adaptive system. Nevertheless, this revolution has introduced new vulnerabilities, especially with respect to the security of digital infrastructure. As detailed in a comprehensive review by [258,259], the rising threat of cyberattacks is a major challenge due to the widespread integration of IoT in modern energy systems. These studies examine smart-grid architecture, categorize cyber threats, and review past attack incidents. As smart grids rely on sophisticated networks of communication and data management and interconnected devices, they are prime targets for cybercriminals who exploit potential flaws.
The effects of such cyberattacks on energy systems can be devastating, leading to shortages of energy supply, misrepresentation of consumption data, loss of revenue, and threats to national security. This section discusses different types of cyber threats to smart grids, the severity of these attacks, and strategies for risk mitigation.
Figure 5 illustrates electricity consumption throughout the life cycle of an AI model. For example, when implementing AI models in the energy market, electricity is consumed during model development, training, and deployment. These values are detailed in a study [253]. Furthermore, the energy sector continues to be heavily impacted by ransomware attacks, with critical infrastructure facing increasing vulnerabilities. According to a report by Sophos [260], the primary root causes of these attacks were exploited vulnerabilities (35%), compromised credentials (32%), and phishing emails (27%), as shown in Figure 6, while misconfiguration and other causes contributed marginally.
Figure 7 highlights the recovery methods, showing a strong reliance on backups, with the majority of organizations using backups to restore data after an attack. A smaller fraction reported paying ransom, recreating data, or using a combination of these methods.
Furthermore, an infection range analysis, shown in Figure 8, revealed that in 30% of incidents, over 75% of the organization’s devices were impacted, demonstrating the devastating reach of such attacks. Approximately 22% of cases involved infection rates below 25%, suggesting some success in containment strategies.

4.3. Types of Cyberattacks on Energy Systems

Energy grids are typically targeted by cyberattacks that exploit the digital infrastructure supporting the generation, distribution, and consumption of energy. Such attacks vary in size, complexity, and purpose and can be classified into the following categories.

Denial of Service (DoS) Attacks

When energy management systems are attacked, an overload of traffic can cause a disruption in services. In the smart grid, a DoS attack can target communication networks, leading to delays or a complete shutdown of energy-distribution systems. Studies by [66, 261] discuss cybersecurity in energy systems using advanced models. The first paper proposes a resilient consensus control strategy embedded with reduced-order dynamic gain filters to identify DoS attacks in multi-agent systems, thereby improving energy efficiency and resilience. The second paper presents a new DDoS attack model for electric vehicle charging stations that employs a time-variant Poisson process and Ornstein–Uhlenbeck dynamics, though it does not provide specific datasets or quantitative accuracy metrics.

4.4. False Data Injection Attack (FDIA)

In a False Data Injection Attack (FDIA), an adversary selectively manipulates measurement data or sends misleading information to the grid’s communication system. This is particularly dangerous in IoT-driven smart grids, where a large number of sensors and interconnected devices including AMI gateways, smart meters, distributed energy resources (DERs) controllers, smart inverters, Phasor Measurement Units (PMUs), Remote Terminal Units (RTUs), smart thermostats, and grid-connected sensors constantly monitor and transmit data. By vulnerabilities in these IoT devices and their messages, attackers can induce errors in state estimation, tamper with electricity consumption reports, conceal illegal activity, interfere with automatic control signals, or cause false alarms at the control center. Within the framework of smart grids, FDIAs have the potential to destabilize the grid, improperly trigger demand–response functions, change dynamic prices, and cause significant losses for both utilities and consumers.
The sophisticated nature of FDIAs makes them difficult to detect, as the injected data can closely mimic legitimate measurements and bypass common anomaly detection [262]. The study by [263] briefly highlights the importance and outcomes of FDIA attacks and the associated challenges. Researchers have addressed these challenges; for example, one study [264] proposed a multimodal deep learning model, including a variational graph auto-encoder (VGAE), a temporal convolutional network (TCN), and a gated recurrent unit (GRU), for the identification and classification of FDIAs under varied power-system topologies. Tested on the IEEE-14 and IEEE-118 bus systems, the model achieved an accuracy of 91.2%. To reduce the impact of FDIAs, a CNN-based model incorporating noise elimination and state estimation was implemented in [265]. In [266,267] researchers suggested a model based on variational mode decomposition (VMD), Fast Independent Component Analysis (FastICA), and an XGBoost classifier optimized with Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO). When tested on the IEEE-14 bus system, this model achieved an accuracy of 99.84%. The sophisticated nature of FDIAs makes them difficult to identify when attackers exploit flaws in communication networks. A common technique used to facilitate such data manipulation is the Man-in-the-Middle (MiTM) attack.

4.4.1. Man-in-the-Middle Attack (MiTM)

In a MiTM attack, an attacker secretly intercepts the traffic between two parties and may alter the data. By placing themselves in the communication process, they can sabotage the confidentiality and integrity of the information. MiTM attacks pose a significant threat to IoT-based smart grids, where data interactions must be secure and trustworthy to ensure reliable operations. To counter these threats, researchers have proposed several countermeasures. For example, Ref. [268] proposed an improved intrusion detection system (IDS) that integrates a machine-learning-based detection, a Quick Random Disturbance Algorithm, and a feature-selection technique. The model was validated on the IEEE-39 and IEEE-118 bus systems with an accuracy rate of 99.99%. In a different study, Ref. [269] proposed a BP-based hybrid deep learning model (AEXB) that integrates an autoencoder with XGBoost to detect and prevent MiTM attacks in real time. Similarly, in [270], a hybrid deep learning algorithm combining a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) and Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) was developed, tested on network traffic data, and achieved an accuracy of 97.85%.

4.4.2. Ransomware Attack

Besides MiTM and FDIA, ransomware attacks have emerged as a significant cybersecurity threat in smart grids [271]. Ransomware refers to malicious software which encrypts vital system information to extort money from victims in exchange for data recovery. Ransomware’s rapid spread necessitates timely detection. To address these issues, various researchers have proposed diverse solutions. For example, Ref. [272] presented a ransomware detection model based on a CNN, which converts binary executable files into 2D grayscale images. This approach achieved an accuracy of 96.22%. In [273], the authors presented a twofold taxonomy of ransomware in cyber–physical systems (CPS), discussing infection vectors, targets, and objectives. They also analyzed real-life cases of ransomware against CPS to identify major security weaknesses. In a separate study, Ref. [274] developed a deep-learning-based ransomware detection framework for SCADA-automated vehicle charging station. Appraising the performance of three deep learning models a deep neural network (DNN), a convolutional neural network (CNN), and a long short-term memory (LSTM) the authors reported that their approach had an average accuracy of 98%.

4.4.3. Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs)

These represent long-term and strategic attacks intended to gain unauthorized entry into critical energy infrastructure. The actors are typically sophisticated and/or state-sponsored. APTs can be difficult to detect, as they are covert and designed to accumulate intelligence or cause destruction over an extended period. APTs may tamper with energy grid operations, steal secrets, or disrupt renewable energy systems [275,276]. These studies also investigate the growing threat of APTs in energy systems, using the MITRE ATTACK framework to identify weaknesses in current mitigation strategies.
Table 16 presents a comparative analysis of several studies, identifying the key findings and limitations.

4.5. Potential Impact of Cyberattacks on Energy Utilization

The implications of cyberattacks on smart grids can have significant consequences, not just for energy distribution but also for public safety, financial markets, and the environment. These are some of the potential effects:
1.
Grid Disruptions and Blackouts: Cyberattacks on critical infrastructure can lead to widespread energy outages. A successful attack on the controllers of power stations or substations can result in blackouts, leaving millions of people without power and disrupting daily life. A coordinated attack on multiple grid nodes can make recovery efforts take days or even weeks.
2.
Financial Losses: Cyberattacks can result in significant financial losses for energy utilities and consumers. Downtime, system recovery costs, and legal liabilities can be extremely expensive for utilities. Data manipulation can lead to unnecessarily high bills for consumers, who may even face penalties for alleged over-utilization of energy due to tampered smart meters.
3.
Energy Efficiency and Sustainability Setbacks: Cyberattacks can sabotage energy-efficiency programs by disrupting smart data and compromising information in smart meters and grid control systems. For example, tampering with energy consumption data might lead to inefficient demand–response programs, which undermines the goals of energy use optimization and carbon reduction.
4.
Loss of Consumer Trust: A cybersecurity incident can erode public confidence in the energy system and the smart grid. When consumers believe their energy or personal information is at risk, they may be unwilling to accept smart meters or participate in energy-efficiency programs. This lack of public trust can make it significantly harder to implement smart-grid projects.

5. Energy Routing and Energy Internet

Energy Internet (EI) is a emerging innovation that enables peer-to-peer (P2P) energy trading and facilitates highly efficient energy distribution. According to [286], EI can be understood as a smart-grid implementation in which energy flows over the Internet similarly to data packets. The study in [287] highlights the advantages of EI, noting that it is open, robust, and reliable. While the concept of EI is widely discussed in China and the United States, analogous frameworks have been identified globally under different terminologies. For example, in Japan, the EI concept is commonly referred to as the Digital Grid.
The Digital Grid in Japan represents a fully decentralized energy system [288], enabling energy transactions for P2P, stabilizing and reinforcing the grid, and supporting new on-demand energy markets. Routers within the Digital Grid facilitate the transfer of energy from point to point, analogous to the movement of data packets on the Internet. This innovation is transforming energy delivery and market dynamics, allowing for more versatile and efficient energy flow. The EI architecture can be structured into seven layers, as illustrated in Figure 9, which are based on the Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) model.
The foundational layer is the physical layer, which consists of energy cells. The energy link layer interconnects these energy cells to enable P2P trading within an Energy Intranet. Energy Routers (ERs) play a central role in establishing and maintaining these connections. The communication layer ensures seamless information exchange among the system, stakeholders, and other entities. The business layer manages financial transactions, while the transmission layer facilitates the transfer of power between various Energy Intranets. Finally, the consumption layer regulates energy usage in the energy cells.
Recent research, such as [289], describes the EI as a transformative network system comprising three primary layers: the physical, information, and value layers. The physical layer interconnects diverse energy sources, including heat, electricity, gas, and cooling to facilitate demand–response and energy sharing among distributed energy resources (DERs). The information layer collects data from the physical layer, enabling real-time coordination and decentralized energy management. The value layer leverages this information to create new business models.
The authors in [290,291] presented an EI model as a decentralized process for trading energy, where resources can exchange energy without the intervention of a centralized operator. System stability is maintained through the operation of an Energy Internet Service Provider (E-ISP), which ensures secure and stable energy exchange by regulating transaction volumes in real-time and managing centralized resources when necessary. The EI architecture is designed to be structurally compatible with traditional Internet protocols, incorporating EI Cards (analogous to MAC addresses) and Energy IP addresses to enable mobility tracking across networks. Additionally, a dedicated energy transport layer protocol ensures reliable delivery of energy communications, while an application layer facilitates standardized energy communication exchanges.
Energy Routers (ERs) play a pivotal role in integration resources within the EI, by enabling the routing of energy across geographically dispersed resources. These devices manage power dispatch, facilitate information exchange, and perfrom transmission scheduling, thereby supporting a dynamic grid and flexible grid structure. ERs are essential for regulating energy flows along interconnected lines, ensuring both stability and operational efficiency of the EI. A typical ER consists of input–output ports that interface with energy sources, electrical loads, and other ERs, as well as a core module comprising power converters and a controller. The literature presents several ER architectures with a generalized structure, illustrated in Figure 10.
Microgrids (MGs) play a vital role within the EI by integrating intelligent devices, storage systems, distributed energy sources, and communication networks to optimize the flow of energy. As the network architecture evolves, traditional routers are being enhanced to support energy-routing functionalities, enabling bidirectional energy transfer and advance routing operations. Energy-routing challenges include consumer matching, congestion mitigation, and failure prevention through transmission scheduling, and determination of optimal energy paths. To address these issues, routing algorithms must be embedded within ERs to distribute energy from a source to a destination. Optimized energy routing not only minimizes transmission losses and maximizes energy delivery but also reduces greenhouse gas emissions and fossil fuel reliance. Furthermore, efficient routing supports renewable energy integration, enhances grid reliability, and stabilizes electricity flow. P2P energy trading and decentralized energy markets heavily rely on these routing protocols, as they facilitate cleaner energy consumption and reduce reliance on fossil-fuel-based power plants.
This section is motivated by the existing gaps in the literature on energy-routing protocols. Existing reviews [292,293,294,295,296,297] exhibit notable limitations: they often fail to provide a systematic classification of routing methods based on their characteristics and functionalities, and lack comprehensive comparative analyses, and offer limited guidance for future research directions. Additionally, these studies do not thoroughly address the diverse methodologies and terminologies employed to tackle energy-routing challenges, which impedes the development of robust and innovative solutions. Energy routing in modern energy networks is a rapidly evolving area, presenting challenges such as dynamic operation, security, and computational efficiency. Therefore, there is a pressing need for an in-depth comparative framework. Such a framework should evaluate routing protocols in terms of their strengths limitations, and suitability across different application environments.
This section addresses these gaps by preenting a comprehensive discussion of energy routing protocols, with particular emphasis on artificial intelligence (AI), Multi-Agent Systems (MASs), and optimization models, including metaheuristics. It offeres an in-depth overview and a structured classification of existing methods, highlighting their strengths and limitations. Furthermore, the proposed framework integrates metaheuristic optimization for minimizing energy losses, AI-driven predictive routing for adaptive decision making, and MAS to enable decentralized control in dynamic, renewable energy networks. The paper also identifies critical challenges such as reducing energy losses, ensuring scalability, integrating renewable energy sources, and responding to fluctuating demand. The future research directions identified herein are intended to guide the development of efficient and sustainable energy routing, ultimately optimizing energy flow within intelligent and decentralized power networks.

5.1. Energy Network Architecture and Routing Constraints

The energy network architecture comprises two layers: the energy transmission layer and the communication layer, interconnected through multiple Energy Routers (ERs) [298,299,300,301,302,303,304]. While the architecture of ERs remains largely consistent across existing studies [305,306,307,308], variations emerge in terms of implementation details and control design strategies.
Energy-routing algorithms, implemented within the ER’s routing controller as shown in Figure 10, adapt their routing decisions dynamically based on information received from the communication layer. It is important to distinguish the energy-routing problem from the Optimal Energy Flow (OEF) problem. The OEF problem primarily addresses system-level optimization, such as determining generation levels and reduce transmission costs. In contrast, the energy-routing problem focuses on real-time energy routing within decentralized networks that involving ERs, distributed energy resources (DERs), and peer-to-peer (P2P) energy trading. It aims to ensure effective energy distribution by determining the best routes for source–load pairs while minimizing transmission losses and adhering to energy constraints.
The (EI) model can be represented as a graph, where of Energy Routers (ERs) represent the vertices and energy transmission lines from the edges, as shown in Figure 11. The routing of energy should be subjected to the following requirements:
  • The total energy loss across all paths within a network, P l o s s , in Equation (1), must be less than the total transmitted energy P T X . Each path consists of one or more ERs that transfer energy packet between the destination and source.
    P l o s s < P T X
  • In Equation (2), the transmitted energy P T X must not exceed the maximum capacity of the selected path. This capacity, denoted as C p a t h , is determined by the minimum ER interface capacity C i n t , and the minimum energy line capacity, C l i n e .
    P T X C p a t h = min ( C i n t , C l i n e )
  • In Equation (3), the total energy transmitted through an energy line must not exceed its capacity, C l i n e .
    P l i n e C l i n e
  • In Equation (4), the energy entering a given ER interface must not exceed its interface capacity, C i n t .
    P i n _ i n t C i n t
  • Minimizing transmission losses T L to identify optimal energy-routing paths is a central focus in the literature [309,310,311,312,313,314,315,316,317,318]. The losses in a DC lines connecting two ERs depend on the line resistance R i j , voltage V i j , prior energy P i j , and the transmitted energy P T X . These parameters are incorporated into Equation (5) to compute T L for the line L i j .
    P l o s s _ l i n e = P T X 2 R i j V i j 2
  • The energy loss within an ER (i), as described in Equation (6), depends on the electronic converter efficiency η i of that ER.
    P l o s s _ E R i = P i n _ E R i ( 1 η i )
  • The total energy loss along a transmission path between a consumer and a producer as expressed in Equation (7), is the sum of all losses in the ERs and the connecting energy lines along that path.
    T L = P l o s s _ E R + P l o s s _ l i n e

5.2. Existing Research on Energy Routing

Numerous studies have investigated the challenges of energy routing in decentralized networks, aiming to enhance efficiency and reliability. These works propose a variety of routing algorithms designed to achieve objectives, such as minimizing energy loss, ensuring scalability and adaptability, and responding to dynamic network conditions. As illustrated in Figure 12, key strategies include Multi-Agent (MA) architectures for decentralized decision-making, metaheuristic optimization techniques for determining optimal energy paths, and artificial intelligence (AI) methods for predictive and adaptive routing. Emerging approaches based on graph theory and game theory are also being explored to further advance energy routing, with comprehensive reviews of these methodologies addressed in separate publications.

5.2.1. AI-Based Approach in Energy Routing

The application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) models and algorithms has gained prominence in automating the complexities of energy management in modern energy systems [319,320,321]. This section provides an in-depth analysis of AI-based computation, highligting its roles, advantages, limitations, and applicability in enhancing energy routing within decentralized energy networks. A comprehensive overview for researchers and practitioners is presented in Table 17.
An example of this approach is a model-free Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) algorithm that optimizes energy management by controlling Energy Routers (ERs) and Distributed Generators (DGs) within sub-grids. The algorithm leverages real-time observations of the system state to make energy allocation decisions [322]. While evaluating on a nine-node network revealed limitations, including high computational demands, the requirement for large dataset, and challenges in hyper-parameter tuning.
In studies by [323,324], neural network-based reinforcement learning methods, including actor–critic and Q-learning algorithms, are employed to enable adaptive energy routing and demand prediction in large-scale energy networks. While these frameworks improve efficiency and resilience, they need for large training datasets, and limited scalability under dynamic conditions.
AI techniques, including DRL and neural network-based approaches, enhance energy routing by enabling adaptive, efficient, and cost-effective management in decentralized networks. However, their high computational demands, dependence on large datasets, and challenges in hyper-parameter tuning underscore the need for further research to improve scalability and support practical deployment. Table 17 presents a comparative analysis of selected studies that apply AI to energy routing.

5.2.2. Metaheuristic Approach in Energy Routing

Metaheuristic algorithms plays a crucial role in optimizing energy-routing protocols by improving path selection, resource allocation, and load balancing, thereby contributing to robust and efficient energy-distribution networks. Their key characteristics, limitations, applicability, and advantages are summarized in Table 18.
Firefly Algorithm (FA) The Firefly Algorithm (FA), inspired by the bioluminescent behavior, is employed in [325,326] to address the subscriber-matching problem in energy networks. In [325], FA is utilized to match consumers with producers based on Euclidean distance and energy price, aiming to minimize overall costs, transmission losses, and distances. The algorithm operates in three phases: (i) parameter initialization(energy quantities, pricing, positions), (ii) fitness evaluation considering demand, supply, losses, and price, and (iii) energy quantity updates to efficiently satisfy consumer requirements. Validated on a 17-node Energy Internet (EI) network, this approach offers a decentralized solution but overlooks critical factors such as Energy Router (ER) impacts, voltage drops, and link impedance, which could lead to increased losses in smart grids. The study in [326] extends FA to optimize energy-efficient routing paths and is tested on an 11-node network with four consumers and seven producers. While both approaches show promise, they could benefit from incorporating dynamic real-time data, enhancing scalability for larger networks, and adopting more accurate loss models. Future research may focus on developing hybrid FA-based models for real-time congestion management and power flowoptimization.
Genetic Algorithms (GAs): Genetic algorithms (GAs) are widely applied in energy optimization, as demonstrated in [327,328]. In [328], GA is employed for subscriber matching by encoding solutions as chromosomes that represent producer–consumer links, aiming to minimize energy losses and overall costs in a 17-node EI network. Similarly, Refs. [327,329] utilize GA for energy-efficient path selection, leveraging crossover and mutation operators to identify low-loss routing paths. These methods, validated on 7- and 17-node networks, reported a 7.75% efficiency improvement over Ant Colony Optimization (ACO). Furthermore, Ref. [328] integrates GA with graph traversal and the U-NSGA-III algorithm for multi-objective optimization, balancing carbon emissions and energy losses using a Parent-Centric Crossover (PCX) to enhance exploration. This hybrid approach was tested on an 11-node network. Despite these advances, GA methods face limitations such as scalability challenges, reliance on centralized control, and limited adaptability to dynamic conditions like network failures or demand fluctuations.
FA and GA provide robust solutions for energy routing, with FA excelling in decentralized subscriber matching and GA offering flexibility for path selection and multi-objective optimization. However, both methods face scalability and adaptability challenges, highlighting the need for hybrid and distributed approaches to improve real-time performance in complex energy networks. Additionally, bio-inspired metaheuristic algorithms, such as Discrete–Artificial Bee Colony (D-ABC) and Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), demonstrated significant potential for optimizing energy routing in smart grid (SG) environments by effectively addressing challenges related to pathfinding, energy allocation, and operational efficiency within the Energy Internet (EI).
Discrete–Artificial Bee Colony (D-ABC): The D-ABC algorithm, as proposed in [309], enhances the traditional Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) method for efficient energy pathfinding within constrained-capacity EI networks. By introducing mutation and crossover operations during the employed and onlooker bee phases, D-ABC achieves faster convergence and mitigates suboptimal solutions through diversified search strategies. Experimental validated in smart-grid environments demonstrates its effectiveness in addressing complex routing challenges. However, the algorithm exhibits limitations, including sensitivity to parameter tuning, memory-intensive processes, and high computational requirements for large-scale networks. Future research could explore adaptive mechanisms and leverage advanced computational resources to enhance scalability and dynamic adaptability in evolving EI systems.
Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO): Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) has been widely applied for energy routing in a smart-grid environment [330,331].In [330], PSO facilitates optimal subscriber matching by selecting producers and allocating energy to meet consumer demand efficiently. Similarly, Ref. [331] employs PSO within a multi-objective framework, optimizing energy paths based on metrics such as transmission latency, hop count, distance, and cost, with validation on a 10-node EI network. Furthermore, a discrete PSO variant, proposed in [332] addresses discontinuous routing issues in a 7-ER network derived from a 30-bus system, improving energy efficiency and minimizing transmission losses. Although PSO offers rapid convergence and high accuracy, it suffers from premature convergence and limited adaptability under dynamic conditions. Future reserach could focus on hybrid approaches and adaptive strategies to enhance scalability and robustness in real-world EI scenarios.
D-ABC and PSO represent powerful bio-inspired approaches for energy routing, with D-ABC excelling in efficient pathfinding and PSO offering versatile optimization for subscriber matching and path selection. Nevertheless, both face challenges related to computational complexity, parameter sensitivity, and scalability in dynamic EI environments. Future research should focus on adaptive and hybrid approaches to enhance robustness, real-time performance, and applicability in large-scale, heterogeneous networks.
Table 18. Overview of energy-routing optimization methods and their characteristics.
Table 18. Overview of energy-routing optimization methods and their characteristics.
ReferencesLimitationsApplicabilityAdvantages
[325]Operates under the belief that reducing Euclidean distance directly reduces losses.Useful for producer identification in less complex, ideal smart-grid frameworks.Optimally identifies the best-fit producers in smart-grid networks.
[326]Employs reduced-complexity models.Improvement is necessary for real-world grid adaptation, along with upgrades to handle larger-scale and more complex environments.Handle the problem of finding optimal energy paths and matching subscribers effectively.
[327]Based on centralized control and complete network visibility, yet it fails to address subscriber matching, scheduling, and has minimal capacity for managing congestion and system failures.Capable of efficient energy routing in orderly networks, but lacks scalability without distributed system designs.Enhances energy-routing efficiency by minimizing power losses, particularly across extended transmission distances, and shows strong adaptability in complex network environments.
[328]Centralized approach incurs heavy computational costs and needs enhanced responsiveness to real-time environmental changes.Useful in energy-routing scenarios requiring multi-objective optimization, enabling a balance between sustainability and system performance.Uses a multi-objective optimization framework that evaluates both power loss and carbon footprint, while introducing advanced exploration techniques to bypass suboptimal results.
[309]Requires considerable time for parameter optimization and large memory resources for population storage, limiting scalability in extensive networks.Optimizes energy routing effectively in compact networks and supports energy-efficient path selection under EI capacity constraints.Utilizes common node-based crossover and mutation to strengthen exploration and accelerate convergence in local optimization.
[330]Lacks scalability and adaptability, and involves substantial computational load and parameter optimization.Designed for stable, medium-scale grids, but can be extended to larger, evolving grids using hybrid techniques.Capable of optimizing different elements of energy routing within medium-scale grid systems.
[331]Early convergence may occur, hindering global optimality exploration, and evaluation steps contribute to high computational overhead.Designed for decentralized energy coordination in dynamic systems with numerous energy sources and users, and is highly applicable to real-world contexts requiring multi-objective optimization and distributed control.Maintains equilibrium between energy supply and demand by applying multi-objective optimization, relying on multiple criteria for effective decisions. Decentralized functionality enhances both scalability and adaptability in changing smart-grid environments.

5.2.3. Multi-Agent Systems for Energy-Routing Optimization

Multi-Agent Systems (MAS) facilitate decentralized decision-making in energy networks, enabling autonomous agents to a manage energy flows, optimize routing paths, and allocate resources dynamically. By promoting distributed intelligence and local adaptability, MAS enhance efficiency, scalability, and resilience in modern energy management and routing applications.
A novel fully distributed peer-to-peer (P2P) control strategy of Networked Renewable Energy Resources (NRERs) is proposed in [333]. The proposed approach integrates MAS with IoT technologies, featuring a dual-layer architecture comprising a primary droop control layer for local energy sharing and a secondary distributed diffusion algorithm layer for network-side optimization. Experimental validation on a modified IEEE 9-node feeder demonstrates a 52.34% reduction in energy losses. However, challenges such as communication latency, system complexity, and security vulnerabilities persist, necessitating advanced strategies for enhanced ER placement and loss minimization.
The study in [334] introduces a MAS-based coordinated scheduling model for Active Distribution Networks (ADNs). The proposed model optimizes Distributed Generation (DG) outputs and minimizes operating costs through iterative bid adjustments and market clearing mechanisms. Simulation on a test comprising four suppliers, three buyers, and four ADNs demonstrates effective energy dispatch and improved system stability. However, the model primarily focuses on market coordination and does not comprehensively routing functions such as dynamic path discovery.
The work in [335] presents a MAS-based distributed electricity trading framework enabling P2P energy sharing among prosumers. The system leverages coalition formation techniques alongside blockchain to ensure secure and transparent transactions, thereby optimizing trading costs and improving scalability. However, the framework does not address energy-routing functions such as transmission-path discovery, highlighting an opportunity for future research to extend its applicability to multi-energy router networks.
References [336,337] explore the integration of MAS with reinforcement learning (RL) for energy management. In [336], a Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) protocol employing Q-learning optimizes energy routing across a 9-ER network, effectively minimizing losses during system failures. Similarly [337] applies Multi-Agent Deep Reinforcement Learning (MADRL) to a 16-node multi-microgrid system, using Markov games to enhance cost efficiency and network stability. However, this framework relies on switches instead of ERs, limiting its direct applicability to fully decentralized EI networks.
MAS enhances energy routing by enabling decentralized control, facilitating P2P energy sharing, ADN scheduling, and RL-based optimization to improve efficiency and resilience. Despite these advantages, challenges such as communication latency, limited scalability, and incomplete routing functionalities highlight the need for future research on adaptive ER strategies and hybrid RL-MAS approaches.

5.3. Characteristics and Key Functions of Energy-Routing Protocol

Designing a robust energy-routing protocol for the Energy Internet (EI) requires addressing key characteristics and core functionalities to ensure efficient, secure, and adaptable energy distribution in dynamic energy networks.
Energy-Routing Schemes: Energy-routing approaches can be categorized asdistributed, centralized, and semi-centralized approaches. Distributed routing allows independent path selection, which reduces losses but may not achieve global optimization. Centralized routing enforces network constraints and minimizes transmission losses but depends on a central controller, both strategies employing a central controller, potentially reducing reliability and privacy. Semi-centralized routing combines both strategies, employing a central controller for constraint management while leveraging distributed algorithms to select efficient paths, thereby balancing computational efficiency and flexibility.
Algorithm Complexity and Computation Time: Algorithm complexity, measured in terms of memory usage and execution time, depends on network size and the employed techniques. More specialized algorithms typically increase complexity, potentially slowing computations and hindering real-time performance in large-scale EI networks.
Energy-Routing Constraints: Routing is constrained by factors such as limited energy supply, Energy Router (ER) capabilities, and link capacities. These constraints require overflow prevention and secure energy delivery, directly affecting path selection and overall system stability.
Congestion Management: Rising energy demand causes congestion, which delays delivery and increases losses. Effective management requires assessing link capacities and employing multi-packet routing to meet consumer needs through multiple sources or paths, thereby mitigating delays and reducing losses.
Failure Handling and Topology Changes: Protocols must adapt dynamically adapt to ER or link failures and topology changes to ensure reliable energy delivery, thereby maintaining network resilience during disruptions.
Security: Security measures including authentication, data integrity, and confidentiality safeguard energy networks against cyber threats, ensuring the secure transmission of energy packets.
Scenarios: Protocols must accommodate diverse scenarios including single-source single-load (SSSL), single-source multi-load (SSML), multi-source multi-load (MSML), and multi-source single-load (MSSL) ensuring flexible operation across varying source and load configurations.
Energy-Routing Functions: The functions of energy routing can be summarized into three main types:
1.
Energy-Efficient Path (EEP): EEP aims to minimize energy losses during transmission by accounting factors such as voltage drops, congestion, and link impedance. Optimal paths must respect ER and link capacities to prevent failures and ensure efficient energy delivery.
2.
Subscriber Matching (SM): SM enables demand-driven peer-to-peer (P2P) energy trading by pairing consumers with suppliers based on delivery time, energy quantity, and price. ERs perform SM to identify optimal suppliers, supporting both one-to-one and one-to-many configurations for efficient fulfillment of critical load demands.
3.
Transmission Scheduling (TS): TS addresses network congestion by scheduling optimal transmission paths according to energy demand and source availability. It mitigates risks associated with bidirectional flows, voltage fluctuations, and intermittent renewable generation, ensuring stable and efficient energy distribution.

5.4. Discussion and Future Directions for Energy-Routing Protocols

Metaheuristics, AI, and MAS architectures provide complementary strengths for energy routing. Metaheuristics excel at optimizing stable networks, AI facilitates dynamic adaptation, and MAS delivers decentralized resilience. Hybrid approaches, augmented with data-efficient AI techniques and security measures such as blockchain, can overcome scalability and computational challenges, fostering sustainable and efficient energy networks. Table 19 presents a concise comparison of energy-routing protocols, highlighting their strengths, limitations, and ideal applications in decentralized energy systems.
Metaheuristic algorithms excel at optimizing energy paths and minimizing transmission losses, making them highly effective for stable networks. However, their high computational demands and sensitivity to parameter settings limit real-time deployment. Integrating reinforcement learning for adaptive parameter tuning, hybridizing with machine learning models, and leveraging GPU-based parallel processing can significantly improve convergence speed, accuracy, and scalability in dynamic energy networks.
AI methods, such as Graph Neural Networks and network flow optimization, enable adaptive, real-time decision-making in dynamic energy networks by predicting and responding to changing conditions. However, their reliance on large datasets and high computational costs poses challenges, which can be mitigated through edge computing and data-efficient algorithms such as few-shot learning.
MAS facilitate decentralized decision-making, providing scalability and flexibility for dynamic topologies and effective congestion management. Coordination challenges in large networks can be mitigated through agent clustering and reinforcement learning, enhancing overall autonomy.
The integration of AI and metaheuristics introduces challenges such as data scarcity and high computational complexity. Energy routing can become more robust and adaptive through efficient data-driven approaches, including federated learning, transfer learning, and decentralized AI systems.
Hybrid protocols that combine metaheuristics, AI, and MAS offer resilient and scalable energy routing. AI can predict demand fluctuations, MAS frameworks enhance decentralized control, and blockchain ensures security. Future research should focus on integrating these approaches to optimize adaptability, security, and sustainability in decentralized energy networks.

5.5. Real-World SCADA Testbed Using Protocol-Specific Traffic: A Case Study

In the literature discussed above, we have extensively analyzed various DL/ML, and hybrid models for detecting cyberattacks a on smart grid. However, a major limitation in existing smart-grid cybersecurity research is that most studies rely on datasets not collected from real-world SCADA devices. Many of these datasets also lack integration with smart grid-specific communication protocols, such as Modbus. Additionally, evaluations are often performed on balanced datasets, which do not accurately reflect the operational condition of real-world smart grids. In real SG infrastructure, a large number of heterogeneous SCADA devices continuously communicating using SCADA-specific protocols. Furthermore, under normal operating conditions, routine communication between devices are far more frequent than malicious activities, such as cyberattacks.
To address these challenges, a recent study conducted by [338] proposed a model that closely replicates real-world smart-grid SCADA deployments. In this study, the authors implemented a fully simulated yet realistic SG network topology, where heterogeneous SCADA devices including distributed energy resources (DERs), DER controllers, smart meters, RTU, field sensors, g gateways, and aggregator platforms communicate using the Modbus protocol, one of the most widely used protocols in SG SCADA system. Figure 13 illustrates the communication among these SG SCADA devices and the deployment scenarios for a potential cyberattack. In this study, the authors collected raw data from this network topology in PCAP format, capturing real-time packet-level exchanges between these devices. From the PCAP files, they extracted 29 Modbus-specific features, including packet-level metrics (such as TCP flags, source/destination IPs, and window sizes) and flow-based features (e.g., flow duration, inter-arrival times, packet entropy, retransmission counts). The resulting Modbus DDoS attack (MDDA) dataset provides one of the most protocol-relevant resources currently available for smart-grid cybersecurity research.
To evaluate model performance under realistic conditions, the authors applied several ML and DL techniques, with a particular focus on a sparse autoencoder (SAE) model. The experimental setup also incorporated Gaussian noise into the network traffic and varied the intensity and durations of attacks to emulate the unpredictability of real-world SG environments.
A key feature of this study is that the authors preserved the natural class imbalance in the dataset, with 662,750 normal samples and 233,891 DDoS samples, rather than applying oversampling or balancing techniques. This approach accurately reflects the actual operational behavior of smart-grid systems, where benign traffic is far more prevalent than attack traffic. The dataset is divided into four training and testing sets to maintain temporal consistency, and the sample distribution is presented in Table 20 of the study.
This real-world case study demonstrates that Modbus-specific attack detection can be effectively achieved using an SAE model, attaining up to 76% detection accuracy, which surpasses baseline models such as Random Forest, CNN, and GRU, as presented in Table 21.
Moreover, it underscores the importance of evaluating models on realistic, protocol-aware, and imbalanced dataset, rather than on generic benchmark datasets like CICIDS2017 or NSL-KDD, which fail to capture the communication structures and traffic characteristics of smart-grid environments.

6. Future Research Directions

6.1. Energy Generation

The comprehensive analysis of factors impacting energy generation, as discussed in the preceding sections, underscores significant advancements in resource assessment, technological efficiency, environmental considerations, policy frameworks, grid integration, geopolitical influences, and cybersecurity. Nevertheless, several gaps and opportunities remain for future research aimed at enhancing the sustainability, reliability, and security of power-generation systems. Below, we outline key directions for future investigation, building on the findings of the referenced studies, to address these challenges and foster innovation in the energy sector.
Considering advanced resource assessment and forecasting, the studies by [1,2,3,4,5] demonstrate significant progress in leveraging GIS-based frameworks, Earth System Models (ESMs), and Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) for resource assessment and forecasting. However, the growing variability of renewable resources due to climate change necessitates further refinement of these models. Future research should prioritize the development of high-resolution, real-time forecasting models that integrate multi-source data, such as satellite imagery, IoT sensor networks, and advanced climate models, to improve the accuracy of solar and wind resource predictions. Furthermore, expanding the open-access dataset initiatives, as illustrated in [5], to encompass diverse geographical regions and extended temporal scales would enhance model validation and generalizability. Research should also investigate hybrid forecasting models that combine physics-based approaches with machine learning, addressing the limitations of standalone models, as suggested by [4].
Enhancing technological efficiency advancements in machine learning and digital-twin technologies, as discussed by [6,7,8,9,10], have significantly enhanced the efficiency of energy-generation systems. Future research should prioritize the developing adaptive, real-time optimization algorithms capable of dynamically adjusting operational parameters in response to fluctuating environmental conditions and grid demands. For example, extending the digital-twin framework proposed by [9] to other renewable technologies, such as solar farms or hybrid systems, could facilitate more and accurate performance monitoring and predictive maintenance. Moreover, integrating physics-informed neural networks (PINNs), as demonstrated in [10], with generative AI models could further improve forecasting accuracy and system resilience, particularly for offshore and remote installations.
Considering climate-resilient energy systems, the studies discussed by [9,11,12,13] emphasize the vulnerability of energy infrastructure to climate-induced disruptions, such as droughts and extreme weather events. Future research should prioritize developing climate-resilient energy infrastructure by integrating long-term climate projections into system design and operation. This includes creating adaptive-capacity models that account for multi-day weather events, as highlighted by [12], and investigating modular, decentralized energy systems to mitigate the impact of regional climate variability. Additionally, research should examine the feasibility of hybrid renewable systems that combine solar, wind, and hydropower to buffer against climate-induced resource shortages, building on the hybrid system insights from [3].
To address challenges and implement policy and regulatory innovations, the studies discussed by [14,17,18,19] emphasize the critical role of integrated policy frameworks in accelerating renewable energy adoption. Future research should investigate dynamic policy models that adapt to evolving technological and geopolitical landscapes. For instance, developing simulation-based policy evaluation tools that combine econometric models, as demonstrated by [14], with real-time energy market data could assist policymakers in designing more responsive and effective regulations. Furthermore, research should aim on overcome barriers to policy implementation, such as political resistance and public acceptance, by leveraging insights from [18] and exploring innovative engagement strategies, including gamified policy communication platforms.
The integration of hybrid energy-storage systems (HESS) and Long-Duration Energy Storage (LDES), as discussed by [22,25], is crucial for ensuring grid stability. Future research should optimizing HESS configurations using advanced control algorithms that account for real-time grid dynamics and renewable intermittency. Building on [23], research should investigate co-optimization models that integrate storage, generation, and transmission planning at a global scale, especially in regions with underdeveloped grid infrastructure. Additionally, the weather-driven charging algorithm proposed by [26] could be extended to include predictive maintenance strategies, thereby enhancing battery longevity and grid reliability in systems with high renewable penetration.
To address the geopolitical and social dynamics issues that influence grid and storage optimization, the studies discussed by [28,29,30,31] highlight the complex interplay of geopolitical risks and social acceptance in energy transitions. Future research should develop predictive models that quantify the impact of geopolitical events on energy supply chains, building on the econometric approach of [28]. Additionally, leveraging machine learning for real-time sentiment analysis, as demonstrated by [30], could be expanded to other social media platforms and regions to better understand and address public opposition to renewable projects. Research should also investigate game-theoretic models, as in [31], to design cooperative international frameworks that balance geopolitical competition with sustainable energy goals.
To ensure the security and stability of energy-generation networks, cybersecurity studies discussed by [34,35,36,37,38] and others highlight the growing sophistication of ML and DL techniques for detecting cyber threats. Nevertheless, challenges such as adversarial attacks and scalability persist. Future research should prioritize development of adversarially resilient models, building on [38], by incorporating Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) to simulate and counter evasive attacks, as suggested by [43]. Additionally, research should investigate federated learning frameworks, as in [58], to enable privacy-preserving, decentralized intrusion detection systems for distributed energy networks. Real-time, scalable detection systems that integrate streaming data, as proposed by [45], should also be emphasized to address evolving cyber threats in smart grids.
A critical gap in the current literature is the lack of interdisciplinary approaches that integrate resource assessment, technological advancements, climate resilience, policy design, grid optimization, and cybersecurity. Future research should prioritize developing holistic frameworks that combine these dimensions. For example, integrating the GIS-based site selection models of [1] with the cybersecurity frameworks of [34] could facilitate the design of secure, resource-efficient renewable energy systems. Similarly, combining the climate resilience strategies of [11] with the policy insights of [14] could guide the development of adaptive, climate-resilient energy policies. Such integrated approaches would ensure that energy systems are sustainable, secure, and resilient to both environmental and geopolitical challenges. Table 22 summarizes the future research directions relevant to energy generation.

6.2. Future Research Directions—T&D

The evolution of smart-grid transmission and distribution (T&D) systems, as detailed in the preceding sections, highlights significant advancements through the integration of IoT, AI, and advanced automation. Nevertheless, the complexity of smart grids introduces challenges such as cybersecurity risks, power quality issues, and the need for scalable, privacy-preserving models. Based on a critical analysis of the current state of research, several directions emerge for future investigation to enhance the reliability, security, and efficiency of T&D systems.
First, the integration of distributed energy resources (DERs) and microgrids presents opportunities for improving grid resilience and reducing reliance on traditional power plants [88,89]. Future research should prioritize developing scalable optimization models for DER integration that account for dynamic load profiles and the intermittent nature of renewable energy sources. Specifically, enhancing the coordination between DERs and energy management systems (EMS) using AI-driven predictive models could improve real-time decision-making and energy distribution efficiency [90,91]. For example, extending the work of Moradi-Sepahvand [123] on integrated T&D models to include adaptive forecasting for EV charging and renewable energy fluctuations could mitigate short-term unpredictability.
Second, cybersecurity remains a critical concern due to the increasing prevalence of cyberattacks such as False Data Injection Attacks (FDIA), Load Redistribution Attacks (LRA), and Denial of Service (DoS) attacks [162,179,181]. While models like DQDN, POMDP, and Q-learning have shown promise in detecting and mitigating these threats [163,167,168], future research should prioritize developing hybrid AI models that integrate supervised, unsupervised, and reinforcement learning to detect sophisticated, multi-vector attacks. Additionally, investigating privacy-preserving techniques, including federated learning [58] and GAN-based synthetic data generation [79], could facilitate secure data sharing among utilities while safeguarding consumer privacy.
Third, the application of advanced AI models, such as Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs), Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) networks, and Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs), has demonstrated significant potential in anomaly detection, load forecasting, and fault diagnosis [138,141,152]. Nevertheless, the scalability of these models in large-scale, real-world T&D systems remains underexplored. Future research should examine the computational efficiency and robustness of these models under noisy or incomplete data conditions, building on the work of Raghuvamsi [83] and Liu [82]. Furthermore, integrating quantum computing with AI models could improve the processing of high-dimensional datasets, enabling faster and more accurate predictions for complex grid operations.
Fourth, the development of direct-current (DC) distribution networks, as proposed by Javid [73], presents a promising approach for reducing power delivery losses in data centers, residential buildings, and renewable energy applications. Future research could focus on designing hybrid AC-DC smart grids with AI-powered control interfaces to optimize power flow and minimize harmonic distortions. This direction could build on the findings of Venkatraman [78] regarding coordinated T&D control under high distributed generation (DG) penetration.
Fifth, the role of advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) and communication networks in enabling two-way communication and real-time monitoring is well-established [85,87]. Nevertheless, the resilience of these systems against cyber–physical attacks, such as Man-in-the-Middle (MiTM) and Time-Delay Attacks (TDA), requires further investigation [174,175]. Future research should focus on adaptive encryption and authentication protocols tailored to the low-latency requirements of synchrophasor protocols and AMI networks. Additionally, leveraging blockchain technology for secure data transmission in smart grids could further enhance grid security and transparency.
Finally, the use of hybrid models combine deep learning with traditional methods, as explored by Almalaq [158,159], demonstrates significant potential for improving forecasting accuracy and operational efficiency. Future studies should investigate the integration of hybrid models with real-time optimization techniques, such as those proposed by Barajas-Villarruel [116] and Tianqi [117], to address multi-objective optimization challenges in T&D systems. These challenges include balancing energy efficiency, cost reduction, and environmental sustainability under varying operational constraints.
The following Table 23 summarizes these future research directions, highlighting the key areas, proposed approaches, and relevant references from the current work.

6.3. Future Research Directions—Energy Utilization

The exploration of energy utilization within smart grids, as detailed in the preceding section, highlights significant advancements in technologies such as Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI), renewable energy integration, energy-storage systems (ESSs), Demand-side management (DSM), artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML). Nevertheless, the paper also identifies critical gaps and challenges, particularly in scalability, real-world validation, cybersecurity, and the integration of emerging technologies. These gaps present opportunities for future research to improve the efficiency, reliability, and security of smart-grid systems, supporting global sustainability objectives [186,187,188].
One prominent area for future research is the scalability and practical deployment of the proposed models and frameworks. For example, studies such as [228,232] rely heavily on simulation-based results (e.g., IEEE 33-bus and IEEE-118 bus systems), which lack real-world validation. Future research should prioritize conducting large-scale, real-world pilot studies to assess the applicability of optimization models for renewable energy integration and ESS. These studies could address the computational complexity and data-quality challenges noted in [230,232], ensuring that models remain robust across diverse grid conditions and geographical regions [231].
Cybersecurity remains as critical concern, with thehighlighting vulnerabilities to Denial of Service (DoS), False Data Injection Attacks (FDIA), Man-in-the-Middle (MiTM), ransomware, and Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs) [258,259]. While models such as those in [264,266,268] demonstrate promising accuracy (e.g., 91.2–99.99%) in detecting cyberattacks, their reliance on specific datasets or simulated environments limits generalizability. Future research should prioritize developing universal, adaptive cybersecurity frameworks capable of operating across heterogeneous grid systems while incorporating real-time, privacy-preserving techniques, as suggested by [280]. Additionally, exploring blockchain-based solutions for secure data transmission in smart grids could mitigate MiTM and FDIA risks, building on the preliminary work of [250,284].
The integration of AI and ML in smart grids, as discussed in [250,253,256], offers considerable potential but faces challenges related to data scarcity, model explainability, and the energy footprint of AI systems. Future research should focus on developing lightweight, energy-efficient AI algorithms that reduce computational demands while maintaining high accuracy in forecasting and anomaly detection [254,255]. Hybrid AI-IoT frameworks, as proposed in [255], could be extended to incorporate federated learning for decentralized data processing, addressing privacy concerns highligted in [253]. Furthermore, research should examine the environmental impact of AI-driven energy systems, particularly the energy consumption associated with model training and deployment, as illustrated in Figure 5 [253].
The variability and intermittency of renewable energy sources, as highlighted in [222,223], remain significant barriers to large-scale integration. Future research should focus on developing advanced forecasting models that leverage real-time weather data and machine learning to enhance the accuracy of renewable energy-generation predictions [226,227]. Additionally, the high capital costs and lifespan limitations of ESS, as discussed in [233,241], underscore the need for research into cost-effective, sustainable battery technologies, such as next-generation lithium-ion alternatives or solid-state batteries. Studies could also investigate the integration of ESS with hybrid renewable systems to optimize load scheduling and strengthen grid stability [236].
Demand-side management (DSM) strategies, as explored in [245,248], demonstrate significant potential for reducing peak loads and emissions but face challenges related to consumer adoption and regional applicability. Future research should focus on developing user-centric DSM frameworks that incorporate behavioral economics and gamification to encourage consumer participation [242,243]. Additionally, cross-regional studies could address the generalizability issues highlighted in [245], ensuring that DSM models remain adaptable to diverse economic and regulatory environments.
This section highlights the role of policy incentives and carbon pricing in accelerating the adoption of smart-grid technologies [209,210]. Future research should examine the impact of dynamic policy frameworks on technology adoption, particularly in regions with underdeveloped regulatory systems, as emphasized in [245]. Economic analyses could also investigate the long-term cost-benefit trade-offs of deploying AMI, ESS, and renewable integration systems, addressing the high deployment costs and economic barriers identified in [218,240]. Table 24 summarizes these future research directions for energy utilization.

6.4. Future Research Directions—Energy Routing

The exploration of energy-routing protocols in the Energy Internet (EI) highlights their significant potential to enhance energy distribution efficiency, scalability, and sustainability. However, as highlighted in [292,293,294,295,296,297], the existing literature often lacks comprehensive classifications, in-depth comparative analyses, and clear guidance for future research. Building on insights from discussed AI-based, metaheuristic, and Multi-Agent System (MAS) approaches, several critical research directions emerge to address challenges related to dynamic operation, scalability, security, and computational efficiency in decentralized energy networks.
A key research direction involves developing hybrid protocols that integrate metaheuristics, AI, and MAS to leverage their complementary strengths. Metaheuristic algorithms, such as the Firefly Algorithm (FA) [325,326] and genetic algorithms (GAs) [326,327,328], are effective for optimizing stable networks but often face challenges in real-time adaptability and scalability. Combining these with AI techniques, such as Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) [322,323,324], can enhance dynamic adaptability by predicting demand fluctuations and network changes. Meanwhile, MAS approaches, as demonstrated in [333,334,335,336,337], facilitating decentralized decision-making, improving resilience and scalability. Hybrid frameworks could employ AI for predictive routing, MAS for autonomous coordination, and metaheuristics for optimal path selection, effectively addressing limitations such as high computational demands and parameter sensitivity.
Scalability remains a critical challenge, particularly for AI-based approaches require extensive datasets and high computational resources [322,323,324], as well as for metaheuristics such as Discrete–Artificial Bee Colony (D-ABC) [309] and Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) [330,331,332]. Future research should focus on incorportaing edge computing and data-efficient learning algorithms, including few-shot learning or federated learning, to reduce computational overhead and enable real-time performance in large-scale EI networks. Furthermore, leveraging GPU-based parallel processing can significantly accelerate the convergence of metaheuristics, such as D-ABC [309], thereby enhancing their applicability in dynamic resource-constrained environments.
Security remains a critical concern, as decentralized energy networks are increasingly vulnerable to cyberattacks and data breaches [333]. Blockchain technology, as demonstrated in [335], offers a promising solution for ensuring secure and transparent P2P energy trading. Future work should prioritize integrating blockchain with MAS and AI-based frameworks to provide robust authentication, data integrity, and confidentiality in energy-routing protocols. Additionally, the development of lightweight cryptographic schemes optimized for resource-constrained Energy Routers (ERs) is essential to maintain high security standards without introducing significant computational overhead.
Dynamic network conditions, such as Energy Router (ER) or link failures and frequsent topology changes, necessitate routing protocols capable of real-time adaptability [336,337]. Future research should focus on developing adaptive ER strategies that integrate MAS with Reinforcement Learning (RL) to effectively manage congestion, mitigate failures, and address renewable energy intermittency. For example, extending MARL approaches, as proposed in [336], to multi-ER environments could significantly enhance path discovery and minimize energy losses. Furthermore, incorporating Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) to model the EI as a graph as suggested in [313,318], can enable predictive and topology-aware routing, thereby improving the networks’ resilience and adaptability under dynamic conditions.
The integration of renewable energy sources introduces significant challenges due to their intermittent and unpredictable nature [289,290]. Future research should focus on designing routing protocols that optimize energy flow from distributed energy resources (DERs) by leveraging AI-based demand forecasting in conjunction with metaheuristic path optimization. For instance, extending the multi-objective optimization framework proposed in [328] to explicitly account for renewable energy variability could help balance carbon emissions, minimize energy losses, and maintain grid stability. Moreover, enhancing hybrid PSO variants [330,331] to prioritize renewable sources in real-time routing decisions would further improve energy utilization and sustainability in dynamic Energy Internet environments.
Congestion management and transmission scheduling (TS) are essential for ensuring efficient and reliable energy delivery within the Energy Internet. Future research should prioritize the development of advanced TS algorithms that utilize AI-driven models to anticipate congestion and dynamically allocate transmission paths, as proposed in [331]. Integrating these approaches with MAS-based distributed control strategies [334] could significantly reduce delays and transmission losses, particular under high-demand conditions. Furthermore, optimizing TS mechanisms for diverse operational scenarios including SSSL, MSML, and MSSL will enhance system resilience and adaptability in large-scale decentralized energy networks.
To address the absence of standardized methodologies highlighted in [292,293], future research should focus on developing a unified framework for energy-routing protocols. This framework should define standardized components such as EI Cards, Energy IP addresses, and transport layer protocols, as suggested in [290], to ensure compatibility with existing Internet architectures. Establishing such standards would enable seamless interoperability across diverse Energy Internet deployments, including large-scale initiatives like the Digital Grid in Japan [288], thereby promoting scalability, reliability, and global integration of decentralized energy systems.
In summary, future research should prioritize the development of hybrid energy-routing protocols that integrate AI, metaheuristics optimization, and MAS. These protocols should leverage enabling technologies such as edge computing, blockchain, and GNNs to ensure scalability, security, and adaptability in dynamic environments. Table 25 provides an overview of these research directions, outlining their objectives, challenges, and potential approaches.

6.5. Future Research Directions for Quantum-Based AI Models

Several AI, ML, DL, and hybrid models have been applied to address smart-grid challenges. These include Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM), Random Forest (RF), autoencoders, Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs), Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs), and hybrid models such as XGBoost, CatBoost, LightGBM, and Cluster Partition–Fuzzy Broad Learning System (CP-FBLS). While these models demonstrate strong performance in applications such as False Data Injection Attack (FDIA) detection, demand forecasting, and energy routing, they also exhibit theoretical and practical limitations that restrict their scalability, adaptability, and efficiency in complex and dynamic smart-grid environments.
For example, LSTM and Gated Recurrent Units (GRUs) are widely used for load-profile analysis and energy-routing optimization due to their capability to process sequential data while mitigating vanishing gradient issues [161]. However, these models are computationally intensive, requiring substantial training time and resources, particularly when applied to large-scale smart-grid datasets with high temporal resolution. Their performance is further constrained by sensitivity to noisy or incomplete data, which is prevalent in real-world grid operations [4]. Moreover, LSTM-based models often struggle with capturing long-term dependencies in highly variable renewable energy data, thereby reducing forecasting accuracy under extreme climatic conditions [2].
Random Forest (RF) models are frequently applied to anomaly detection and demand forecasting in smart grids due to their robustness against overfitting and ability to handle high-dimensional datasets [3]. However, RF lacks inherent mechanisms for modeling sequential dependencies, which restricts its capability to capture complex temporal patterns in time-series data. Consequently, its effectiveness diminishes in dynamic smart-grid environments where real-time adaptability is critical [6].
Autoencoders have demonstrated high accuracy (up to 99.99%) in detecting FDIA attacks by effectively modeling normal operational patterns [339]. However, their performance is highly sensitive to hyperparameter tuning and the quality of training data. They often fail to generalize across diverse attack scenarios, particularly against sophisticated Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs) that exploit subtle data manipulations [275]. Additionally, their reliance on unsupervised learning increases susceptibility to false positives in noisy grid environments.
ANNs are widely employed for hybrid renewable energy forecasting and energy-routing optimization [3,324]. Despite their predictive capabilities, ANNs require large labeled datasets for effective training a constraint in smart-grid applications due to data privacy concerns and limited availability of real-world operational data [5]. GANs, have emerged as a powerful tool for generating synthetic data to enhance cybersecurity training in the smart grids. However, they face significant challenges such as training instability and mode collapse, which hinder their ability to capture the full diversity of attack patterns [340].
Hybrid models such as XGBoost, CatBoost, and LightGBM have demonstrated superior predictive performance in smart-grid applications, achieving notably low forecast errors (e.g., 8.02% in [6]). Similarly, CP-FBLS exhibits strong performance in detecting FDIA attacks [162]. Despite these advantages, these models are computationally intensive, demanding substantial resources for both training and real-time deployment. Moreover, their inherent black-box nature compromises interpretability, posing a significant barrier for grid operators who require explainable decision-making processes [283]. Additionally, CP-FBLS’s dependency on fuzzy logic introduces sensitivity to parameter tuning, potentially reducing robustness in dynamic and uncertain grid environments.
MAS-based frameworks have been widely adopted for decentralized energy routing and control in smart grids [334,335] However, they encounter significant scalability challenges in large-scale enviornments due to high communication overhead and increased coordination complexity. Furthermore, these systems remain vulnerable to cyberattacks that exploit inter-agent communication channels, posing security risks [338].
Collectively, these limitations computational complexity, sensitivity to data quality, limited generalization capability, and lack of interpretability underscore the necessity for innovative approaches that enhance scalability, robustness, and efficiency of AI models in smart-grid applications.
Quantum–AI integration presents a promising avenue to overcome the inherent limitations of classical AI, ML, DL, and hybrid models. By leveraging fundamental quantum principles such as superposition, entanglement, and quantum parallelism, quantum computing enables significantly accelerated computations, making it particularly suitable for complex optimization and pattern-recognition tasks in smart grids [341].
Compared to classical models such as LSTM, ANNs, and hybrid models (e.g., [6,161]), which are computationally intensive, particularly for large-scale grid datasets, quantum algorithms offer significant speed advantages. Algorithms like the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) and Variational Quantum Eigensolver (VQE) exploit quantum parallelism to accelerate complex tasks [342]. For example, QAOA can enhance ANN training by efficiently solving combinatorial optimization problems such as hyperparameter tuning, at speeds exponentially faster than classical gradient-based methods [343]. This capability facilitates real-time energy routing and FDIA attack detection in dynamic and large-scale grid environments.
Specifically, autoencoders and GANs face challenges in generalizing across diverse attack scenarios and handling noisy data [339,340]. Quantum Neural Networks (QNNs), by leveraging quantum entanglement, can more effectively model complex, high-dimensional data distributions [344]. For instance, QNNs can enhance FDIA detection by learning subtle patterns in noisy SCADA datasets, thereby improving robustness against APTs [275]. Additionally, quantum-enhanced feature-selection techniques can reduce input dimensionality, mitigating the negative effects of incomplete or low-quality datasets [345].
Furthermore, the black-box nature of hybrid models such as CP-FBLS and XGBoost limits their interpretability [283]. Quantum-inspired algorithms, including quantum kernel methods, can generate probabilistic outputs compatible with explainable AI frameworks, providing grid operators with clearer insights into decision-making processes [343]. For example, quantum kernel-based classifiers can be integrated with MAS to deliver interpretable energy-routing decisions, thereby enhancing trust in decentralized control systems [334].
Furthermore, MAS-based energy-routing protocols encounter scalability challenges due to high communication overhead [335]. Quantum communication techniques, such as Quantum Key Distribution (QKD), can secure agent interactions against cyberattacks, while quantum optimization algorithms can enhance coordination efficiency in large-scale grids [342]. For instance, quantum-enhanced reinforcement learning (QRL) can optimize Multi-Agent energy routing by efficiently solving high-dimensional Markov Decision Processes, outperforming classical methods [336].
Current quantum hardware, including noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) devices, suffers from limited qubit counts and high error rates, making the implementation of QNNs or QAOA computationally intensive for large-scale smart-grid applications [342]. These limitations constrain their immediate deployment in resource-constrained environments. Additionally, quantum computers require specialized infrastructure, such as cryogenic cooling, which increases deployment costs relative to classical systems [343], posing a barrier to widespread adoption in smart grids. Quantum algorithms for smart-grid applications remain in the early stages of development, with limited real-world validation compared to established classical models like LSTM or RF [3,161,345]. Furthermore, implementing Quantum–AI solutions necessitates expertise in quantum computing, which is currently scarce among grid operators and researchers [346].
Advancements in quantum hardware and algorithms are expected to address these challenges in the near future. By 2030, improvements in qubit coherence times and error correction are projected to enable stable NISQ devices capable of supporting large-scale smart-grid optimization tasks [342]. Cloud-based quantum computing platforms will reduce infrastructure costs, making Quantum–AI solutions more accessible to utilities [347]. Furthermore, hybrid quantum–classical frameworks will facilitate incremental adoption by bridging current classical models with emerging quantum systems [345]. As quantum algorithm libraries mature, their integration with smart-grid applications will become increasingly seamless, allowing quantum-enhanced AI models to operate effectively for real-time forecasting, cybersecurity, and energy routing.

7. Conclusions

The increasing digitization of smart grids has transformed power generation while simultaneously introducing significant cybersecurity risks, necessitating advanced detection and mitigation strategies. This paper synthesizes state-of-the-art approaches, including CP-BLS, multimodal deep learning, and autoencoder models, demonstrating their effectiveness in countering cyber threats such as FDIA, DoS, and Replay Attacks. It further highlights the critical role of AI-driven solutions, including ANNs and GANs, in optimizing transmission and distribution systems and energy-routing protocols. The analysis encompasses resource assessment, environmental impacts, policy frameworks, grid integration, and geopolitical influences, underscoring their effect on energy security and sustainability. Despite these advances, challenges related to computational complexity, scalability, and real-time adaptability in T&D systems remain significant. Future research should prioritize hybrid routing protocols, edge computing, low-shot learning, and Quantum–AI integration to enhance grid resilience and operational efficiency. These developments are essential for aligning smart-grid systems with global sustainability objectives and ensuring robust, secure energy infrastructure.

Author Contributions

W.A., S.K. and S.A. focused on the Generation, Transmission and Distribution (T&D) sections of the work, where they provided in-depth analysis and insights into the optimization and challenges associated with these critical components of the power system. They also contributed significantly to outlining the future work related to enhancing T&D systems, particularly in the context of integrating renewable energy sources and improving grid stability. H.I. and M.A. concentrated on the Utilization, Routing, and Future Work sections. Their work emphasized the effective utilization of energy, the optimization of energy-routing strategies, and explored advanced solutions for integrating energy-storage systems. They also proposed several avenues for future work, focusing on the potential applications of AI and machine learning in enhancing the efficiency of energy-routing systems. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author on request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
AMIAdvanced Metering Infrastructure
ANNArtificial Neural Networks
APTsAdvanced Persistent Threats
BEMSBuilding Energy Management Systems
CP-BLS      Cluster Partition Fuzzy Broad Learning System
CNNConvolutional Neural Network
D-ABCDiscrete-Artificial Bee Colony
DERDistributed Energy Resources
DoSDenial of Service
DSMDemand-Side Management
ESSEnergy Storage Systems
EMSEnergy Management Systems
FDIAFalse Data Injection Attack
GANGenerative Adversarial Networks
GNNsGraph Neural Networks
LRALoad Redistribution Attack
LSTMLong Short-Term Memory
MASMulti-Agent Systems
MiTMMan-in-the-Middle
MLMachine Learning
P2PPeer-to-Peer
PMUPhasor Measurement Unit
PSOParticle Swarm Optimization
Q-learningQ-Learning (Reinforcement Learning)
RAReplay Attack
RNNRecurrent Neural Network
RLReinforcement Learning
RTURemote Terminal Unit
SGSmart Grid
T&DTransmission and Distribution
TDATime-Delay Attack
TSTransmission Scheduling
XGBoost    Extreme Gradient Boosting

References

  1. Jiang, W.; Zhang, S.; Wang, T.; Zhang, Y.; Sha, A.; Xiao, J.; Yuan, D. Evaluation method for the availability of solar energy resources in road areas before route corridor planning. Appl. Energy 2024, 356, 122260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Chen, G.; Ji, Z. A review of solar and wind energy resource projection based on the Earth system model. Sustainability 2024, 16, 3339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Shafi, I.; Khan, H.; Farooq, M.S.; Diez, I.d.l.T.; Miró, Y.; Galán, J.C.; Ashraf, I. An Artificial Neural Network-Based Approach for Real-Time Hybrid Wind–Solar Resource Assessment and Power Estimation. Energies 2023, 16, 4171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Pereira, S.; Abreu, E.F.M.; Iakunin, M.; Cavaco, A.; Salgado, R.; Canhoto, P. Method for solar resource assessment using numerical weather prediction and artificial neural network models based on typical meteorological data: Application to the south of Portugal. Sol. Energy 2022, 236, 225–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Chen, Y.; Xu, J. Solar and wind power data from the Chinese state grid renewable energy generation forecasting competition. Sci. Data 2022, 9, 577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Abubakar, M.; Che, Y.; Zafar, A.; Al-Khasawneh, M.A.; Bhutta, M.S. Optimization of solar and wind power plants production through a parallel fusion approach with modified hybrid machine and deep learning models. Intell. Data Anal. 2025, 29, 808–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Jiang, Z.; Li, H.; Yang, H.; Wu, H.; Liu, W.; Chen, Z. Review of Artificial Intelligence-Based Design Optimization of Wind Power Systems. Wind 2025, 5, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Méndez-Cruz, L.E.; Salazar-Pereyra, M.; Lugo-Leyte, R.; Sales-Cruz, M.; Torres-Aldaco, A.; Lugo-Méndez, H.D. Thermodynamic Evaluation of the Hybrid Combined Cycle Power Plant in the Valley of Mexico. Energies 2025, 18, 1901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Branlard, E.; Jonkman, J.; Brown, C.; Zhang, J. A digital twin solution for floating offshore wind turbines validated using a full-scale prototype. Wind Energy Sci. 2024, 9, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Gijón, A.; Pujana-Goitia, A.; Perea, E.; Molina-Solana, M.; Gómez-Romero, J. Prediction of wind turbines power with physics-informed neural networks and evidential uncertainty quantification. arXiv 2023, arXiv:2307.14675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Shuai, H.; Li, F.; Zhu, J.; Tingen Ii, W.J.; Mukherjee, S. Modeling the impact of extreme summer drought on conventional and renewable generation capacity: Methods and a case study on the Eastern US power system. Appl. Energy 2024, 363, 122977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Grochowicz, A.; Van Greevenbroek, K.; Bloomfield, H.C. Using power system modelling outputs to identify weather-induced extreme events in highly renewable systems. Environ. Res. Lett. 2024, 19, 054038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Harang, I.; Heymann, F.; Stoop, L.P. Incorporating climate change effects into the European power system adequacy assessment using a post-processing method. Sustain. Energy Grids Netw. 2020, 24, 100403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Tello, W.P. Policy interactions and electricity generation sector CO2 emissions: A quasi-experimental analysis. Energy Policy 2025, 198, 114434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Nazir, I.; Mushtaq, N.; Ziafat, B.; Fareed, M.F.; Amin, W. A Reserved Pricing Mechanism for Nano/Peco Smart Grid Peer-to-Peer Energy Trading. In Proceedings of the 2024 3rd International Conference on Emerging Trends in Electrical, Control, and Telecommunication Engineering (ETECTE), Lahore, Pakistan, 26–27 November 2024; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  16. Mushtaq, N.; Nazir, I.; Azad, M.; Ishfaq, H.; Fareed, M.F.; Amin, W. Optimal Selection of Trading Partner in Peer-to-Peer Energy Markets. In Proceedings of the 2024 3rd International Conference on Emerging Trends in Electrical, Control, and Telecommunication Engineering (ETECTE), Lahore, Pakistan, 26–27 November 2024; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  17. Hu, G.; Yang, J.; Li, J.; Cheng, X.; Feng, C. National climate legislation and policymaking and energy security: International evidence. Appl. Energy 2024, 375, 124157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Omri, A.; Jabeur, S.B. Climate policies and legislation for renewable energy transition: The roles of financial sector and political institutions. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 2024, 203, 123347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Lopez Soto, D.; Mejdalani, A.; Nogales, A.; Tolmasquim, M.; Hallack, M. Advancing the Policy Design and Regulatory Framework for Renewable Energies in Latin America and the Caribbean for Grid-Scale and Distributed Generation; IDB: Washington, DC, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  20. Feng, K.; Yang, Z.; Zhuo, Y.; Jiao, L.; Wang, B.; Liu, Z. Impact of carbon tax on renewable energy development and environmental–economic synergies. Energies 2024, 17, 5347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Izmirlioglu, Y.; Pham, L.; Son, T.C.; Pontelli, E. A survey of multi-agent systems for smartgrids. Energies 2024, 17, 3620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Adeyinka, A.M.; Esan, O.C.; Ijaola, A.O.; Farayibi, P.K. Advancements in hybrid energy storage systems for enhancing renewable energy-to-grid integration. Sustain. Energy Res. 2024, 11, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Manocha, A.; Mantegna, G.; Patankar, N.; Jenkins, J.D. Reducing transmission expansion by co-optimizing sizing of wind, solar, storage and grid connection capacity. Environ. Res. Energy 2025, 2, 015011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Amin, W.; Ahmad, F.; Umer, K.; Khawaja, A.H.; Afzal, M.; Ahmed, S.A.; Chaitusaney, S. P2p energy trading: An optimal solution for energy shortage in pakistan. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 89614–89633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Staadecker, M.; Szinai, J.; Sánchez-Pérez, P.A.; Kurtz, S.; Hidalgo-Gonzalez, P. The value of long-duration energy storage under various grid conditions in a zero-emissions future. Nat. Commun. 2024, 15, 9501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Bhatt, D.; Penumatsa, S.; Singhal, N. Weather-Driven Priority Charging for Battery Storage Systems in Hybrid Renewable Energy Grids. In Proceedings of the 2025 9th International Conference on Green Energy and Applications (ICGEA), Singapore, 7–9 March 2025; pp. 170–175. [Google Scholar]
  27. U.S. Energy Information Administration. Today in Energy. Available online: https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=64586 (accessed on 1 August 2025).
  28. Zhu, Z.; Hunjra, A.I.; Alharbi, S.S.; Zhao, S. Global energy transition under geopolitical risks: An empirical investigation. Energy Econ. 2025, 145, 108495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Mary, B.J. The Geopolitics of Energy Transition: Lessons from Germany’s Green Policies and Their Implications for Global Sustainability. 2025. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/388952243_The_Geopolitics_of_Energy_Transition_Lessons_from_Germany’s_Green_Policies_and_Their_Implications_for_Global_Sustainability (accessed on 1 August 2025).
  30. Vågerö, O.; Bråte, A.; Wittemann, A.; Robinson, J.Y.; Zeyringer, M.; Sirotko-Sibirskaya, N. Machine learning of public sentiments towards wind energy in Norway. Wind Energy 2024, 27, 583–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Zhao, X.; Huang, W. Global geopolitical changes and new/renewable energy game. Energies 2024, 17, 4115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kim, S.Y.; Ganesan, K.; Dickens, P.; Panda, S. Public sentiment toward solar energy opinion mining of twitter using a transformer-based language model. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ren, J.T. Harnessing public sentiment: A literature review of sentiment analysis in energy research. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2025, 219, 115739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Yin, T.; Naqvi, S.A.R.; Nandanoori, S.P.; Kundu, S. Advancing cyber-attack detection in power systems: A comparative study of machine learning and graph neural network approaches. In Proceedings of the 2024 Resilience Week (RWS), Austin, TX, USA, 3–5 December 2024; pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  35. Almalaq, A.; Albadran, S.; Mohamed, M.A. Deep machine learning model-based cyber-attacks detection in smart power systems. Mathematics 2022, 10, 2574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Sakhnini, J.; Karimipour, H.; Dehghantanha, A. Smart grid cyber attacks detection using supervised learning and heuristic feature selection. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 7th International Conference on Smart Energy Grid Engineering (SEGE), Oshawa, ON, Canada, 12–14 August 2019; pp. 108–112. [Google Scholar]
  37. Liu, X.; Ospina, J.; Konstantinou, C. Deep Reinforcement Learning for Cybersecurity Assessment of Wind Integrated Power Systems. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 208378–208394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Anthi, E.; Williams, L.; Rhode, M.; Burnap, P.; Wedgbury, A. Adversarial attacks on machine learning cybersecurity defences in industrial control systems. J. Inf. Secur. Appl. 2021, 58, 102717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Wang, W.; Harrou, F.; Bouyeddou, B.; Senouci, S.-M.; Sun, Y. A stacked deep learning approach to cyber-attacks detection in industrial systems: Application to power system and gas pipeline systems. Clust. Comput. 2022, 25, 561–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Aslam, M.M.; Tufail, A.; Irshad, M.N. Survey of Deep Learning Approaches for Securing Industrial Control Systems: A Comparative Analysis. Cyber Secur. Appl. 2025, 3, 100096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Zhang, J.; Pan, L.; Han, Q.-L.; Chen, C.; Wen, S.; Xiang, Y. Deep learning based attack detection for cyber-physical system cybersecurity: A survey. IEEE/CAA J. Autom. Sin. 2021, 9, 377–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Wu, W.; Harrou, F.; Bouyeddo, B.; Senouci, S.-M.; Sun, Y. Deep learning-based stacked models for cyber-attack detection in industrial internet of things. Neural Comput. Appl. 2025, 37, 19617–19651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Khaw, Y.M.; Jahromi, A.A.; Arani, M.; Kundur, D. Evasive attacks against autoencoder-based cyberattack detection systems in power systems. Energy AI 2024, 17, 100381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Sahu, A.; Nguyen, T.; Chen, K.; Zhang, X.; Hassanaly, M. Detection of False Data Injection Attacks (FDIA) on Power Dynamical Systems With a State Prediction Method. IEEE Access 2024, 13, 12411–12426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Hallaji, E.; Razavi-Far, R.; Wang, M.; Saif, M.; Fardanesh, B. A stream learning approach for real-time identification of false data injection attacks in cyber-physical power systems. IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 2022, 17, 3934–3945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Yin, X.; Zhu, Y.; Xie, Y.; Hu, J. PowerFDNet: Deep learning-based stealthy false data injection attack detection for AC-model transmission systems. IEEE Open J. Comput. Soc. 2022, 3, 149–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Zhu, Y.; Liu, R.; Chang, D.; Guo, H. Detection of false data injection attacks on power systems based on measurement-eigenvalue residual similarity test. Front. Energy Res. 2023, 11, 1285317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Wang, C.; Tindemans, S.; Pan, K.; Palensky, P. Detection of false data injection attacks using the autoencoder approach. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Probabilistic Methods Applied to Power Systems (PMAPS), Liège, Belgium, 18–21 August 2020; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  49. Drayer, E.; Routtenberg, T. Detection of false data injection attacks in smart grids based on graph signal processing. IEEE Syst. J. 2019, 14, 1886–1896. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Xu, B.; Guo, F.; Wen, C.; Deng, R.; Zhang, W.-A. Detecting false data injection attacks in smart grids with modeling errors: A deep transfer learning based approach. arXiv 2021, arXiv:2104.06307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Niu, X.; Li, J.; Sun, J.; Tomsovic, K. Dynamic detection of false data injection attack in smart grid using deep learning. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Power & Energy Society Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference (ISGT), Washington, DC, USA, 18–21 February 2019; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  52. Chen, K.; Nguyen, T.; Hassanaly, M. Adversarial Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning for Proactive False Data Injection Detection. arXiv 2024, arXiv:2411.12130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Chen, Y.; Lakshminarayana, S.; Poor, H.V. Moving Target Defense Against Adversarial False Data Injection Attacks In Power Grids. IEEE Internet Things J. 2025, 12, 26315–26327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Mahmoudnezhad, F.; Moradzadeh, A.; Mohammadi-Ivatloo, B.; Zare, K.; Ghorbani, R. Electric load forecasting under false data injection attacks via denoising deep learning and generative adversarial networks. IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 2024, 18, 3247–3263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Wang, Q.; Zhang, J.; Hu, J.; Wu, S.; Hou, S.; Tang, Y. A CGAN-based adversarial attack method for data-driven state estimation. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2025, 170, 110878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Zideh, M.J.; Khalghani, M.R.; Solanki, S.K. An unsupervised adversarial autoencoder for cyber attack detection in power distribution grids. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2024, 232, 110407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Zheng, F.; Li, W.; Li, H.; Yang, L.; Sun, Z. Research on load frequency control system attack detection method based on multi-model fusion. Energy Inform. 2025, 8, 72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Shrestha, R.; Mohammadi, M.; Sinaei, S.; Salcines, A.; Pampliega, D.; Clemente, R.; Sanz, A.L.; Nowroozi, E.; Lindgren, A. Anomaly detection based on lstm and autoencoders using federated learning in smart electric grid. J. Parallel Distrib. Comput. 2024, 193, 104951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Shen, Y.; Qin, Z. Detection, differentiation and localization of replay attack and false data injection attack based on random matrix. Sci. Rep. 2024, 14, 2758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Huang, C.; Deng, S.; Ge, H. Resilient load frequency control of cyber-physical power systems with off-the-shelf redundant communication channels under FDI attacks. Meas. Energy 2025, 100053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. An, H.; Xing, Y.; Zhang, G.; Bamisile, O.; Li, J.; Huang, Q. Cluster partition-fuzzy broad learning-based fast detection and localization framework for false data injection attack in smart distribution networks. Sustain. Energy Grids Netw. 2024, 40, 101534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Hong, C.; Liang, Z.; Yang, Y.; Li, P.; Chen, L.; Bi, L.; Zhang, Y. Research on detection and defense methods for false data injection attacks in power systems based on state-space decomposition. Discov. Appl. Sci. 2025, 7, 760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Zhai, Z.-M.; Moradi, M.; Lai, Y.-C. Detecting Attacks and Estimating States of Power Grids from Partial Observations with Machine Learning. PRX Energy 2025, 4, 013003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Abir, S.M.A.A.; Anwar, A.; Choi, J.; Kayes, A. IoT-enabled smart energy grid: Applications and challenges. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 50961–50981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Amin, M. A smart self-healing grid: In pursuit of a more reliable and resilient system [in my view]. IEEE Power Energy Mag. 2013, 12, 110–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Kumar, K.P.; Saravanan, B.; Swarup, K.S. Optimization of renewable energy sources in a microgrid using artificial fish swarm algorithm. Energy Procedia 2016, 90, 107–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Qi, F.; Yu, P.; Chen, B.; Li, W.; Zhang, Q.; Jin, D.; Zhang, G.; Wang, Y. Optimal planning of smart grid communication network for interregional wide-area monitoring protection and control system. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Energy Internet (ICEI), Beijing, China, 21–25 May 2018; pp. 190–195. [Google Scholar]
  68. Cavus, M. Advancing Power Systems with Renewable Energy and Intelligent Technologies: A Comprehensive Review on Grid Transformation and Integration. Electronics 2025, 14, 1159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Tabassum, S.; Babu, A.R.V.; Dheer, D.K. A comprehensive exploration of IoT-enabled smart grid systems: Power quality issues, solutions, and challenges. Sci. Technol. Energy Transit. 2024, 79, 62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Shah, S.N.H. IoT enabled smart grid integration with edge computing method. In Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Communication, Computing and Digital Systems (C-CODE), Islamabad, Pakistan, 17–18 May 2023; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  71. Judge, M.A.; Khan, A.; Manzoor, A.; Khattak, H.A. Overview of smart grid implementation: Frameworks, impact, performance and challenges. J. Energy Storage 2022, 49, 104056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Tabassum, S.; Babu, A.R.V.; Dheer, D.K.; Pasha, M.M. Inspection and surveillance of energy consumption in IoT-smart grid using wireless sensor network. In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE 6th International Conference on Condition Assessment Techniques in Electrical Systems (CATCON), Durgapur, India, 17–19 December 2022; pp. 308–312. [Google Scholar]
  73. Javid, Z.; Kocar, I.; Holderbaum, W.; Karaagac, U. Future distribution networks: A review. Energies 2024, 17, 1822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Rezaei, N.; Tarimoradi, H.; Deihimi, M. A coordinated management scheme for power quality and load consumption improvement in smart grids based on sustainable energy exchange based model. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2022, 51, 101903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Utkarsh, K.; Ding, F. Self-organizing map-based resilience quantification and resilient control of distribution systems under extreme events. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2022, 13, 1923–1937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Wu, H.; Xu, Z.; Zhao, J.; Chai, S. Gridtopo-GAN for distribution system topology identification. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 2022, 19, 5356–5366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Yan, R.; Yuan, Y.; Wang, Z.; Geng, G.; Jiang, Q. Synthetic Active Distribution System Generation via Unbalanced Graph Generative Adversarial Network. arXiv 2021, arXiv:2108.00599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Venkatraman, R.; Khaitan, S.K.; Ajjarapu, V. Dynamic co-simulation methods for combined transmission-distribution system with integration time step impact on convergence. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2018, 34, 1171–1181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Mohammadabadi, S.M.S.; Entezami, M.; Moghaddam, A.K.; Orangian, M.; Nejadshamsi, S. Generative artificial intelligence for distributed learning to enhance smart grid communication. Int. J. Intell. Netw. 2024, 5, 267–274. [Google Scholar]
  80. Udhaya Shankar, C.; Ram Inkollu, S.; Nithyadevi, N. Deep Learning Based Effective Technique for Smart Grid Contingency Analysis Using RNN with LSTM. Electr. Power Compon. Syst. 2023, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Saldaña-González, A.E.; Aragüés-Peñalba, M.; Sumper, A. Distribution network planning method: Integration of a recurrent neural network model for the prediction of scenarios. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2024, 229, 110125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Liu, G.; Bai, Y.; Liu, J.; Zhao, H.; Liang, G.; Zhao, J. MDRAE: An Attention Mechanism-Based Autoencoder for Missing Data Recovery in Smart Grids. In Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE 7th Conference on Energy Internet and Energy System Integration (EI2), Hangzhou, China, 15–18 December 2023; pp. 5190–5195. [Google Scholar]
  83. Raghuvamsi, Y.; Teeparthi, K.; Kosana, V. Denoising autoencoder based topology identification in distribution systems with missing measurements. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2023, 154, 109464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Li, Z.; Wang, J.; Sun, H.; Guo, Q. Transmission contingency analysis based on integrated transmission and distribution power flow in smart grid. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2015, 30, 3356–3367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Fang, X.; Misra, S.; Xue, G.; Yang, D. Smart Grid The New and Improved Power Grid: A Survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2012, 14, 944–980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Kiasari, M.; Ghaffari, M.; Aly, H.H. A Comprehensive Review of the Current Status of Smart Grid Technologies for Renewable Energies Integration and Future Trends: The Role of Machine Learning and Energy Storage Systems. Energies 2024, 17, 4128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Jung, O. The Increasingly Critical Role of Communication Networks in Enhancing Power Grid Resilience Under Climate Change. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Smart Cities and Green ICT Systems, Porto, Portugal, 2–3 April 2025; pp. 180–187. [Google Scholar]
  88. Babayomi, O.; Zhang, Z.; Dragicevic, T.; Hu, J.; Rodriguez, J. Smart grid evolution: Predictive control of distributed energy resources A review. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2023, 147, 108812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Shi, J.; Ma, L.; Li, C.; Liu, N.; Zhang, J. A comprehensive review of standards for distributed energy resource grid-integration and microgrid. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 170, 112957. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Khan, N.; Shahid, Z.; Alam, M.M.; Bakar Sajak, A.A.; Mazliham, M.; Khan, T.A.; Ali Rizvi, S.S. Energy management systems using smart grids: An exhaustive parametric comprehensive analysis of existing trends, significance, opportunities, and challenges. Int. Trans. Electr. Energy Syst. 2022, 2022, 3358795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Hernandez-Matheus, A.; Löschenbrand, M.; Berg, K.; Fuchs, I.; Aragüés-Peñalba, M.; Bullich-Massague, E.; Sumper, A. A systematic review of machine learning techniques related to local energy communities. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 170, 112651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Ahmad, T.; Madonski, R.; Zhang, D.; Huang, C.; Mujeeb, A. Data-driven probabilistic machine learning in sustainable smart energy/smart energy systems: Key developments, challenges, and future research opportunities in the context of smart grid paradigm. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 160, 112128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Alsuwian, T.; Shahid Butt, A.; Amin, A.A. Smart grid cyber security enhancement: Challenges and solutions A review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 14226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Hasan, M.K.; Habib, A.A.; Shukur, Z.; Ibrahim, F.; Islam, S.; Razzaque, M.A. Review on cyber-physical and cyber-security system in smart grid: Standards, protocols, constraints, and recommendations. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2023, 209, 103540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Ghiasi, M.; Niknam, T.; Wang, Z.; Mehrandezh, M.; Dehghani, M.; Ghadimi, N. A comprehensive review of cyber-attacks and defense mechanisms for improving security in smart grid energy systems: Past, present and future. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2023, 215, 108975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Krivohlava, Z.; Chren, S.; Rossi, B. Failure and fault classification for smart grids. Energy Inform. 2022, 5, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Yip, S.-C.; Wong, K.; Hew, W.-P.; Gan, M.-T.; Phan, R.C.-W.; Tan, S.-W. Detection of energy theft and defective smart meters in smart grids using linear regression. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2017, 91, 230–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Si, C.; Xu, S.; Wan, C.; Chen, D.; Cui, W.; Zhao, J. Electric load clustering in smart grid: Methodologies, applications, and future trends. J. Mod. Power Syst. Clean Energy 2021, 9, 237–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Priya, B.; Malhotra, J. An Intelligent User-RAT association for 5G enabled Smart Grid. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Conference on Computing, Power and Communication Technologies (GUCON), Greater Noida, India, 2–4 October 2020; pp. 300–304. [Google Scholar]
  100. Li, D.; Jayaweera, S.K. Distributed smart-home decision-making in a hierarchical interactive smart grid architecture. IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst. 2014, 26, 75–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Zhang, X.; Nakhai, M.R.; Zheng, G.; Lambotharan, S.; Chambers, J.A. Distributed foresighted energy management in smart-grid-powered cellular networks. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2019, 68, 4064–4068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Garcia, E.D.; Pereira, P.R.; Canha, L.N.; Popov, V.A. Grid functional blocks methodology to dynamic operation and decision making in Smart Grids. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2018, 103, 267–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Li, D.; Jayaweera, S.K. Machine-learning aided optimal customer decisions for an interactive smart grid. IEEE Syst. J. 2014, 9, 1529–1540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Zhang, W.; Xu, Y.; Li, S.; Zhou, M.; Liu, W.; Xu, Y. A distributed dynamic programming-based solution for load management in smart grids. IEEE Syst. J. 2016, 12, 402–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Abud, T.P.; Augusto, A.A.; Fortes, M.Z.; Maciel, R.S.; Borba, B.S.M.C. State of the art Monte Carlo method applied to power system analysis with distributed generation. Energies 2022, 16, 394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Khan, Z.A.; Jayaweera, D. Approach for smart meter load profiling in Monte Carlo simulation applications. IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 2017, 11, 1856–1864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Zangirolami, V.; Borrotti, M. Dealing with uncertainty: Balancing exploration and exploitation in deep recurrent reinforcement learning. Knowl. Based Syst. 2024, 293, 111663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Yu, R.; Zhong, W.; Xie, S.; Zhang, Y.; Zhang, Y. QoS differential scheduling in cognitive-radio-based smart grid networks: An adaptive dynamic programming approach. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. Learn. Syst. 2015, 27, 435–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Wang, H.; Ruan, J.; Wang, G.; Zhou, B.; Liu, Y.; Fu, X.; Peng, J. Deep learning-based interval state estimation of AC smart grids against sparse cyber attacks. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 2018, 14, 4766–4778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Zhao, Z.; Keerthisinghe, C. A fast and optimal smart home energy management system: State-space approximate dynamic programming. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 184151–184159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Bassamzadeh, N.; Ghanem, R. Multiscale stochastic prediction of electricity demand in smart grids using Bayesian networks. Appl. Energy 2017, 193, 369–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Kaur, D.; Anwar, A.; Kamwa, I.; Islam, S.; Muyeen, S.M.; Hosseinzadeh, N. A Bayesian deep learning approach with convolutional feature engineering to discriminate cyber-physical intrusions in smart grid systems. IEEE Access 2023, 11, 18910–18920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Jindal, A.; Dua, A.; Kaur, K.; Singh, M.; Kumar, N.; Mishra, S. Decision tree and SVM-based data analytics for theft detection in smart grid. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 2016, 12, 1005–1016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Wang, Y.; Kong, T. Air quality predictive modeling based on an improved decision tree in a weather-smart grid. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 172892–172901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Benti, N.E.; Chaka, M.D.; Semie, A.G. Forecasting renewable energy generation with machine learning and deep learning: Current advances and future prospects. Sustainability 2023, 15, 7087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Barajas-Villarruel, L.R.; Rico-Ramirez, V.; Castrejón-González, E.O. Optimization models for the generation, distribution and transmission of electricity in a macroscopic system: Representation of operational regions as energy hubs. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2022, 187, 645–661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Tianqi, L.; Guochen, Y.; Jing, G.; Xueyan, P.; Bo, Y. Research on Optimization of Power Grid Planning for Comprehensive Transmission and Distribution Tariff Reform. In Proceedings of the 2023 3rd International Signal Processing, Communications and Engineering Management Conference (ISPCEM), Montreal, QC, Canada, 25–27 November 2023; pp. 675–681. [Google Scholar]
  118. Ogbogu, N.; Anaemeje, G. Electric Power Transmission Optimization. J. Res. Natl. Dev. 2011, 9, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  119. Amin, W.; Huang, Q.; Li, J.; Khan, A.A.; Subramaniam, U.; Selvam, S. A secure energy management model for Peer-to-Peer smart grids with user-centric constraints. Internet Things 2025, 33, 101678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Bragin, M.A.; Dvorkin, Y.; Darvishi, A. Toward Coordinated Transmission and Distribution Operations. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting (PESGM), Portland, OR, USA, 5–10 August 2018; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  121. Saukh, S.; Borysenko, A. Representation of transmission and distribution networks in the mathematical model of the electricity market equilibrium. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 20th International Conference on Computational Problems of Electrical Engineering (CPEE), Lviv, Ukraine, 15–18 September 2019; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
  122. Cordova, S.; Moreira, A.; Heleno, M. Netload Range Cost Curves for a Transmission-Aware Distribution System Planning under DER Growth Uncertainty. arXiv 2024, arXiv:2402.07428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Moradi-Sepahvand, M.; Amraee, T.; Aminifar, F.; Akbari, A. Coordinated expansion planning of transmission and distribution systems integrated with smart grid technologies. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2023, 147, 108859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Ghulam, A.; Sikander, R.; Ali, F. AI and Machine Learning-based practices in various domains: A Survey. VAWKUM Trans. Comput. Sci. 2022, 10, 21–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Bashir, A.K.; Khan, S.; Prabadevi, B.; Deepa, N.; Alnumay, W.S.; Gadekallu, T.R.; Maddikunta, P.K.R. Comparative analysis of machine learning algorithms for prediction of smart grid stability. Int. Trans. Electr. Energy Syst. 2021, 31, e12706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Rangel-Martinez, D.; Nigam, K.; Ricardez-Sandoval, L.A. Machine learning on sustainable energy: A review and outlook on renewable energy systems, catalysis, smart grid and energy storage. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2021, 174, 414–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Viloria, A.; Zelaya, N.A.L.; Varela, N. Unsupervised learning algorithms applied to grouping problems. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2020, 175, 677–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Sivamayil, K.; Rajasekar, E.; Aljafari, B.; Nikolovski, S.; Vairavasundaram, S.; Vairavasundaram, I. A systematic study on reinforcement learning based applications. Energies 2023, 16, 1512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Arrieta-Prieto, M.; Schell, K.R. Spatially transferable machine learning wind power prediction models: V-logit random forests. Renew. Energy 2024, 223, 120066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Ponkumar, G.; Jayaprakash, S.; Kanagarathinam, K. Advanced machine learning techniques for accurate very-short-term wind power forecasting in wind energy systems using historical data analysis. Energies 2023, 16, 5459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Karaman, Ö.A. Prediction of wind power with machine learning models. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 11455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Pradhan, A. Support vector machine-a survey. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Adv. Eng. 2012, 2, 82–85. [Google Scholar]
  133. Awad, M.; Khanna, R. Efficient Learning Machines: Theories, Concepts, and Applications for Engineers and System Designers; Springer Nature: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  134. Anand, P.; Rastogi, R.; Chandra, S. A class of new support vector regression models. Appl. Soft Comput. 2020, 94, 106446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Alshboul, O.; Shehadeh, A.; Almasabha, G.; Almuflih, A.S. Extreme gradient boosting-based machine learning approach for green building cost prediction. Sustainability 2022, 14, 6651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. McCulloch, W.S.; Pitts, W. A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity. Bull. Math. Biophys. 1943, 5, 115–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Zakaria, M.; Mabrouka, A.S.; Sarhan, S. Artificial neural network: A brief overview. Neural Netw. 2014, 1, 2. [Google Scholar]
  138. McClellan, J.; Parks, T.W.; Rabiner, L. A computer program for designing optimum FIR linear phase digital filters. IEEE Trans. Audio Electroacoust. 2003, 21, 506–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Yamamoto, Y.; Anderson, B.D.O.; Nagahara, M.; Koyanagi, Y. Optimizing FIR approximation for discrete-time IIR filters. IEEE Signal Process. Lett. 2003, 10, 273–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Sherstinsky, A. Fundamentals of recurrent neural network (RNN) and long short-term memory (LSTM) network. Phys. D Nonlinear Phenom. 2020, 404, 132306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Aghdam, H.H.; Heravi, E.J. Guide to Convolutional Neural Networks; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2017; Volume 10, p. 51. [Google Scholar]
  142. O’shea, K.; Nash, R. An introduction to convolutional neural networks. arXiv 2015, arXiv:1511.08458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Wang, Y. A new concept using LSTM Neural Networks for dynamic system identification. In Proceedings of the 2017 American Control Conference (ACC), Seattle, WA, USA, 24–26 May 2017; pp. 5324–5329. [Google Scholar]
  144. Grossberg, S. Recurrent neural networks. Scholarpedia 2013, 8, 1888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Zhai, J.; Zhang, S.; Chen, J.; He, Q. Autoencoder and its various variants. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), Miyazaki, Japan, 7–10 October 2018; pp. 415–419. [Google Scholar]
  146. Sondak, D.; Protopapas, P. Learning a reduced basis of dynamical systems using an autoencoder. Phys. Rev. E 2021, 104, 034202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Chen, S.; Guo, W. Auto-encoders in deep learning a review with new perspectives. Mathematics 2023, 11, 1777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Kohonen, T. Self-Organization and Associative Memory; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; Volume 8. [Google Scholar]
  149. Vesanto, J.; Alhoniemi, E. Clustering of the self-organizing map. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. 2000, 11, 586–600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  150. Nazir, I.; Mushtaq, N.; Ishfaq, H.; Amin, W.; Maaliw, R.R.; Shi, X.; Saleem, M.A. Blockchain Enabled Reserved Pricing and Privacy Preserving Model for Peer-to-Peer Energy Trading In Smart Grid. IEEE Trans. Consum. Electron. 2025, 71, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Liu, Y.; Weisberg, R.H. A review of self-organizing map applications in meteorology and oceanography. In Self-Organizing Maps: Applications and Novel Algorithm Design; InTech: Rijeka, Croatia, 2011; Volume 1, pp. 253–272. [Google Scholar]
  152. Saxena, D.; Cao, J. Generative adversarial networks (GANs) challenges, solutions, and future directions. ACM Comput. Surv. 2021, 54, 1–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Mao, X.; Li, Q.; Xie, H.; Lau, R.Y.; Wang, Z.; Paul Smolley, S. Least squares generative adversarial networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, Venice, Italy, 22–29 October 2017; pp. 2794–2802. [Google Scholar]
  154. Husz’ar, F. How (not) to train your generative model: Scheduled sampling, likelihood, adversary? arXiv 2015, arXiv:1511.05101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Theis, L.; Oord, A.v.d.; Bethge, M. A note on the evaluation of generative models. arXiv 2015, arXiv:1511.01844. [Google Scholar]
  156. Amran, Y.A.; Amran, Y.M.; Alyousef, R.; Alabduljabbar, H. Renewable and sustainable energy production in Saudi Arabia according to Saudi Vision 2030; Current status and future prospects. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 247, 119602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Bedi, J.; Toshniwal, D. Deep learning framework to forecast electricity demand. Appl. Energy 2019, 238, 1312–1326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Almalaq, A.; Zhang, J.J. Deep learning application: Load forecasting in big data of smart grids. In Deep Learning: Algorithms and Applications; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 103–128. [Google Scholar]
  159. Almalaq, A.; Zhang, J.J. Evolutionary deep learning-based energy consumption prediction for buildings. IEEE Access 2018, 7, 1520–1531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Sehovac, L.; Nesen, C.; Grolinger, K. Forecasting building energy consumption with deep learning: A sequence to sequence approach. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Congress on Internet of Things (ICIOT), Milan, Italy, 8–13 July 2019; pp. 108–116. [Google Scholar]
  161. Zhang, Y.; Yang, X.; Fang, C.; Cai, P.; Chen, B.; Li, T. Short-term building load forecasting based on similar day selection and LSTM network. In Proceedings of the 2018 2nd IEEE Conference on Energy Internet and Energy System Integration (EI2), Beijing, China, 20–22 October 2018; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  162. Achaal, B.; Adda, M.; Berger, M.; Ibrahim, H.; Awde, A. Study of smart grid cyber-security, examining architectures, communication networks, cyber-attacks, countermeasure techniques, and challenges. Cybersecurity 2024, 7, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. An, D.; Yang, Q.; Liu, W.; Zhang, Y. Defending against data integrity attacks in smart grid: A deep reinforcement learning-based approach. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 110835–110845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Liu, Y.; Dong, M.; Ota, K.; Li, J.; Wu, J. Deep reinforcement learning based smart mitigation of DDoS flooding in software-defined networks. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE 23rd International Workshop on Computer Aided Modeling and Design of Communication Links and Networks (CAMAD), Barcelona, Spain, 17–19 September 2018; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  165. Wei, F.; Wan, Z.; He, H. Cyber-attack recovery strategy for smart grid based on deep reinforcement learning. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2019, 11, 2476–2486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Feng, M.; Xu, H. Deep reinforecement learning based optimal defense for cyber-physical system in presence of unknown cyber-attack. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI), Honolulu, HI, USA, 27 November–1 December 2017; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  167. Necip Kurt, M.; Ogundijo, O.; Li, C.; Wang, X. Online cyber-attack detection in smart grid: A reinforcement learning approach. arXiv 2018, arXiv:1809.05258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Jokar, P.; Leung, V.C.M. Intrusion detection and prevention for ZigBee-based home area networks in smart grids. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2016, 9, 1800–1811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Parras, J.; Almod’ovar, A.; Apell’aniz, P.A.; Zazo, S. Inverse reinforcement learning: A new framework to mitigate an Intelligent Backoff Attack. IEEE Internet Things J. 2022, 9, 24790–24799. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  170. Liu, X.; Xu, Y.; Jia, L.; Wu, Q.; Anpalagan, A. Anti-jamming communications using spectrum waterfall: A deep reinforcement learning approach. IEEE Commun. Lett. 2018, 22, 998–1001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Zhang, Y.; Cheng, Y. An amplification DDoS attack defence mechanism using reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE SmartWorld, Ubiquitous Intelligence & Computing, Advanced & Trusted Computing, Scalable Computing & Communications, Cloud & Big Data Computing, Internet of People and Smart City Innovation (SmartWorld/SCALCOM/UIC/ATC/CBDCom/IOP/SCI), Leicester, UK, 19–23 August 2019; pp. 634–639. [Google Scholar]
  172. Chen, Y.; Huang, S.; Liu, F.; Wang, Z.; Sun, X. Evaluation of reinforcement learning-based false data injection attack to automatic voltage control. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2018, 10, 2158–2169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  173. Conti, M.; Dragoni, N.; Lesyk, V. A survey of man in the middle attacks. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2016, 18, 2027–2051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Kulkarni, S.; Rahul, R.K.; Shreyas, R.; Nagasundari, S.; Honnavalli, P.B. MITM intrusion analysis for advanced metering infrastructure communication in a smart grid environment. In Trends in Computational Intelligence, Security and Internet of Things, Proceedings of the Third International Conference, ICCISIoT 2020, Tripura, India, 29–30 December 2020; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020; pp. 256–267. [Google Scholar]
  175. Fritz, J.J.; Sagisi, J.; James, J.; Leger, A.S.; King, K.; Duncan, K.J. Simulation of man in the middle attack on smart grid testbed. In Proceedings of the 2019 SoutheastCon, Huntsville, AL, USA, 11–14 April 2019; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  176. Wu, Y.; Weng, J.; Qiu, B.; Wei, Z.; Qian, F.; Deng, R.H. Random delay attack and its applications on load frequency control of power systems. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE Conference on Dependable and Secure Computing (DSC), Hangzhou, China, 18–20 November 2019; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  177. Mo, Y.; Sinopoli, B. Secure control against replay attacks. In Proceedings of the 2009 47th Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing (Allerton), Monticello, IL, USA, 30 September–2 October 2009; pp. 911–918. [Google Scholar]
  178. Zhu, M.; Martinez, S. On the performance analysis of resilient networked control systems under replay attacks. IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 2013, 59, 804–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Liu, Y.; Ning, P.; Reiter, M.K. False data injection attacks against state estimation in electric power grids. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. Secur. 2011, 14, 1–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Chen, J.; Liang, G.; Cai, Z.; Hu, C.; Xu, Y.; Luo, F.; Zhao, J. Impact analysis of false data injection attacks on power system static security assessment. J. Mod. Power Syst. Clean Energy 2016, 4, 496–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Yuan, Y.; Li, Z.; Ren, K. Modeling load redistribution attacks in power systems. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2011, 2, 382–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Jhaveri, R.H.; Patel, S.J.; Jinwala, D.C. DoS attacks in mobile ad hoc networks: A survey. In Proceedings of the 2012 Second International Conference on Advanced Computing & Communication Technologies, Rohtak, India, 7–8 January 2012; pp. 535–541. [Google Scholar]
  183. Liang, L.; Zheng, K.; Sheng, Q.; Huang, X. A denial of service attack method for an iot system. In Proceedings of the 2016 8th International Conference on Information Technology in Medicine and Education (ITME), Fuzhou, China, 23–25 December 2016; pp. 360–364. [Google Scholar]
  184. Xu, W.; Ma, K.; Trappe, W.; Zhang, Y. Jamming sensor networks: Attack and defense strategies. IEEE Netw. 2006, 20, 41–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  185. Yi, P.; Zhu, T.; Zhang, Q.; Wu, Y.; Pan, L. Puppet attack: A denial of service attack in advanced metering infrastructure network. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2016, 59, 325–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  186. Fuller, J.; Obiomon, P.; Abood, S.I. Power System Operation, Utilization, and Control; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  187. Guo, Z.; Wei, W.; Chen, L.; Dong, Z.Y.; Mei, S. Impact of energy storage on renewable energy utilization: A geometric description. IEEE Trans. Sustain. Energy 2020, 12, 874–885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  188. Wang, Z.; Li, M.; Cao, N.; Liao, P.; Ji, Y.; Han, F. Enhancing renewable energy utilization and energy management strategies for new energy yachts. Heliyon 2024, 10, e018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Lü, X.; Wu, Y.; Lian, J.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, C.; Wang, P.; Meng, L. Energy management of hybrid electric vehicles: A review of energy optimization of fuel cell hybrid power system based on genetic algorithm. Energy Convers. Manag. 2020, 205, 112474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Capehart, B.L.; Turner, W.C.; Kennedy, W.J. Guide to Energy Management; River Publishers: Gistrup, Denmark, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  191. Rathor, S.K.; Saxena, D. Energy management system for smart grid: An overview and key issues. Int. J. Energy Res. 2020, 44, 4067–4109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  192. Meliani, M.; Barkany, A.E.; Abbassi, I.E.; Darcherif, A.M.; Mahmoudi, M. Energy management in the smart grid: State-of-the-art and future trends. Int. J. Eng. Bus. Manag. 2021, 13, 18479790211032920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Dambhare, M.V.; Butey, B.; Moharil, S.V. Solar photovoltaic technology: A review of different types of solar cells and its future trends. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2021, 1913, 012053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  194. Victoria, M.; Haegel, N.; Peters, I.M.; Sinton, R.; Jäger-Waldau, A.; Del Cañizo, C.; Breyer, C.; Stocks, M.; Blakers, A.; Kaizuka, I.; et al. Solar photovoltaics is ready to power a sustainable future. Joule 2021, 5, 1041–1056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. Porté-Agel, F.; Bastankhah, M.; Shamsoddin, S. Wind-turbine and wind-farm flows: A review. Bound.-Layer Meteorol. 2020, 174, 1–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  196. Bošnjaković, M.; Katinić, M.; Santa, R.; Marić, D. Wind turbine technology trends. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  197. Schaffarczyk, A.P. Introduction to Wind Turbine Aerodynamics; Springer Nature: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  198. Luderer, G.; Madeddu, S.; Merfort, L.; Ueckerdt, F.; Pehl, M.; Pietzcker, R.; Rottoli, M.; Schreyer, F.; Bauer, N.; Baumstark, L.; et al. Impact of declining renewable energy costs on electrification in low-emission scenarios. Nat. Energy 2022, 7, 32–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  199. Balali, Y.; Stegen, S. Review of energy storage systems for vehicles based on technology, environmental impacts, and costs. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 135, 110185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  200. Panigone, S.; Sandri, F.; Ferri, R.; Volpato, A.; Nudo, E.; Nicolini, G. Environmental impact of inhalers for respiratory diseases: Decreasing the carbon footprint while preserving patient-tailored treatment. BMJ Open Respir. Res. 2020, 7, e000571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  201. Oluokun, O.A.; Akinsooto, O.; Ogundipe, O.B.; Ikemba, S. Optimizing Demand Side Management (DSM) in industrial sectors: A policy-driven approach. J. Ind. Energy Effic. 2024, 12, 240–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  202. Sarker, E.; Halder, P.; Seyedmahmoudian, M.; Jamei, E.; Horan, B.; Mekhilef, S.; Stojcevski, A. Progress on the demand side management in smart grid and optimization approaches. Int. J. Energy Res. 2021, 45, 36–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  203. Rezaei, N.; Ahmadi, A.; Deihimi, M. A comprehensive review of demand-side management based on analysis of productivity: Techniques and applications. Energies 2022, 15, 7614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  204. Aoun, A.; Ghandour, M.; Ilinca, A.; Ibrahim, H. Demand-side management. In Hybrid Renewable Energy Systems and Microgrids; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2021; pp. 463–490. [Google Scholar]
  205. Moreno Escobar, J.J.; Morales Matamoros, O.; Tejeida Padilla, R.; Lina Reyes, I.; Quintana Espinosa, H. A comprehensive review on smart grids: Challenges and opportunities. Sensors 2021, 21, 6978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  206. Chen, Z.; Amani, A.M.; Yu, X.; Jalili, M. Control and optimisation of power grids using smart meter data: A review. Sensors 2023, 23, 2118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  207. Dewangan, F.; Abdelaziz, A.Y.; Biswal, M. Load forecasting models in smart grid using smart meter information: A review. Energies 2023, 16, 1404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  208. Orlando, M.; Estebsari, A.; Pons, E.; Pau, M.; Quer, S.; Poncino, M.; Bottaccioli, L.; Patti, E. A smart meter infrastructure for smart grid IoT applications. IEEE Internet Things J. 2021, 9, 12529–12541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  209. Yang, Y.; Bremner, S.; Menictas, C.; Kay, M. Modelling and optimal energy management for battery energy storage systems in renewable energy systems: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 167, 112671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  210. Stephanie, F.; Karl, L. Incorporating Renewable Energy Systems for a New Era of Grid Stability. Fusion Multidiscip. Res. Int. J. 2020, 1, 37–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  211. Tavakoli, A.; Saha, S.; Arif, M.T.; Haque, M.E.; Mendis, N.; Oo, A.M.T. Impacts of grid integration of solar PV and electric vehicle on grid stability, power quality and energy economics: A review. IET Energy Syst. Integr. 2020, 2, 243–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  212. Khan, S.; Mazhar, T.; Shahzad, T.; Khan, M.A.; Rehman, A.U.; Hamam, H. Integration of smart grid with industry 5.0: Applications, challenges and solutions. Meas. Energy 2025, 5, 100031. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  213. Wang, Z.; Liao, P.; Liu, S.; Ji, Y.; Han, F. Scenario-based energy management optimization of hydrogen-electric-thermal systems in sustainable shipping. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2025, 99, 566–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  214. Ganesh, P.M.J.; Sundaram, B.M.; Balachandran, P.K.; Mohammad, G.B. IntDEM: An intelligent deep optimized energy management system for IoT-enabled smart grid applications. Electr. Eng. 2025, 107, 1925–1947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  215. Amuthan, N.; Sathya, M.; Rani, N.C. Empowering Consumers and Utilities for a Smarter Future: The Pivotal Role of Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI) in Smart Meter Technology. In Cloud Computing in Smart Energy Meter Management; Wiley Online Library: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2025; pp. 31–65. [Google Scholar]
  216. Nasruddin, M.; Ramli, S.; Abdullah, M. Malaysia’s Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI): A Regulatory Review. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2025, 1511, 012018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  217. Azar, J.; Al Saleh, M.; Couturier, R.; Noura, H. Text Mining and Unsupervised Deep Learning for Intrusion Detection in Smart-Grid Communication Networks. IoT 2025, 6, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  218. WKI Information. Advanced Metering Infrastructure Market: Q1 and Q2 2025 Predictions; WKI Information: San Francisco, CA, USA, 2025; Forecast Market Size of USD 29.63 Billion in 2025 and CAGR of 11.23% from 2025 to 2033; Available online: https://www.wkinformation.com/market-reports/advanced-metering-infrastructure-market/ (accessed on 1 August 2025).
  219. World Bank. Survey of International Experience in Advanced Metering Infrastructure and Its Implementation; International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, The World Bank Group: Washington, DC, USA, 2018; Report. Global AMI Best Practices in Deployment, Governance, Procurement, Security, and Organization; Available online: https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/957331569246407856/pdf/Survey-of-International-Experience-in-Advanced-Metering-Infrastructure-and-its-Implementation.pdf (accessed on 1 August 2025).
  220. 360iResearch. Advanced Metering Infrastructure Market: Global Forecast 2025–2030; 360iResearch: Pune, India, 2025; Industry Report. Projected to Grow from USD 24.89 Billion in 2025 to USD 45.48 Billion by 2030 at a CAGR of 12.88%; Available online: https://www.360iresearch.com/library/intelligence/advanced-metering-infrastructure (accessed on 1 August 2025).
  221. Şimşek, H.H. Advanced Metering Infrastructure: Top 10+ Solutions [2025]; AIMultiple: Tallinn, Estonia, 2025; Industry Review. Qualitative Analysis of AMI Solutions, Architecture Components, and Complementary Tools for Utilities; Available online: https://research.aimultiple.com/advanced-metering-infrastructure/ (accessed on 1 August 2025).
  222. Lamb, M. Advanced Metering Infrastructure: Continued Evolution and Opportunities to Deliver Greater Value. Clim. Energy 2025, 41, 14–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  223. Shahveran, E.; Yousefi, H. Replacing fossil fuel-based power plants with renewables to meet Iran’s environmental commitments in the electricity sector. Renew. Sustain. Energy Transit. 2025, 7, 100102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  224. Meenatchi, K.; Veena, P.; Gowtham, A.; Sabarichandru, S.R.; Elavarasan, T.; Sanjay, V. AI Powered Renewable Load Sharing: A Sustainable Alternative to Fossil Fuel-Based System for Efficiency and Low Emissions. In Proceedings of the 2025 8th International Conference on Trends in Electronics and Informatics (ICOEI), Tirunelveli, India, 24–26 April 2025; pp. 227–232. [Google Scholar]
  225. Li, R.; Tu, Q.; Feng, H.; Zou, Z. Demand response based battery energy storage systems design and operation optimization. Energy Build. 2025, 338, 115738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  226. Ojo, O.T.; Salman, M.B.; Agbanusi, I.L.; Azubuike, C.H.; Olaleye, T.G.; Oyesanya, A.; Ajiboye, J.A. Enhancing Power Grid Resilience Through Energy Storage and Demand Response. Path Sci. 2025, 11, 8023–8029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  227. Lehning, M.; Dujardin, J.; Cintas, A. The value of weather forecasts for optimally placed wind and solar electricity generators. Front. Energy Res. 2025, 13, 1533778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  228. Alizadeh, H.; Khajehzadeh, A.; Eslami, M.; Shahbazzadeh, M.J. A holistic approach to enhance reliability and profitability through reliable efficiency index optimization and renewable energy integration. Sci. Rep. 2025, 15, 11853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  229. Ergun, S.; Dik, A.; Boukhanouf, R.; Omer, S. Large-scale renewable energy integration: Tackling technical obstacles and exploring energy storage innovations. Sustainability 2025, 17, 1311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  230. Alizadeh Aliabadi, M.; Pradhan, R.; Sattar, R.; Mahmood Fatah, A.N.; Abbas, J.K.; Kunamnei, R.; Salih, N.; Hussien Alawadi, A.; Kumar, A. Integration of renewable energy using the concept of energy hub to reduce the effect of uncertainty. J. Chin. Inst. Eng. 2025, 48, 214–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  231. Wang, H.; Zhang, J.; Wang, P.; Zhang, N. The role of demand-side flexibilities on low-carbon transition in power system: A case study of West Inner Mongolia, China. Renew. Energy 2025, 242, 122478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  232. Rasool, M.H.; Taylan, O.; Perwez, U.; Batunlu, C. Comparative assessment of multi-objective optimization of hybrid energy storage system considering grid balancing. Renew. Energy 2023, 216, 119107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  233. Iqbal, M.A.; Gil, J.-M.; Kim, S.K. Attention-driven hybrid ensemble approach with bayesian optimization for accurate energy forecasting in jeju island’s renewable energy system. IEEE Access 2025, 13, 7986–8010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  234. Alshareef, R.S.; Maghrabie, H.M. Building-integrated photovoltaics with energy storage systems—A comprehensive review. J. Energy Storage 2025, 116, 115916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  235. Mahadevan, V.; Raja S, S.; Rusho, M.A.; Yishak, S. Critical review of Energy Storage Systems: A comparative assessment of Mechanisms, Advantages, Challenges, and Integration with Renewable Energy. Results Eng. 2025, 26, 105589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  236. Manoharan, Y.; Olson, K.; Headley, A.J. Sensitivity of energy storage system optimization program to the source of renewable energy in the presence of demand side management: A behind-the-meter case study. Appl. Energy 2025, 388, 125557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  237. Lu, Y.; Chen, M.; Zhu, G.; Zhang, Y. Recent progress in the study of integrated solar cell-energy storage systems. Nanoscale 2024, 16, 8778–8790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  238. Kandhasamy, M.; Duvaragan, B.K.; Kamaraj, S.; Shanmugam, G. An Overview on Classification of Energy Storage Systems. In Materials for Boosting Energy Storage. Volume 2: Advances in Sustainable Energy Technologies; ACS Publications: Washington, DC, USA, 2024; pp. 1–25. [Google Scholar]
  239. Aghmadi, A.; Mohammed, O.A. Energy storage systems: Technologies and high-power applications. Batteries 2024, 10, 141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  240. Razmjoo, A.; Ghazanfari, A.; stergaard, P.A.; Jahangiri, M.; Sumper, A.; Ahmadzadeh, S.; Eslamipoor, R. Moving toward the expansion of energy storage systems in renewable energy systems a techno-institutional investigation with artificial intelligence consideration. Sustainability 2024, 16, 9926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  241. Njema, G.G.; Ouma, R.B.O.; Kibet, J.K. A review on the recent advances in battery development and energy storage technologies. J. Renew. Energy 2024, 2024, 2329261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  242. Basmadjian, R. Demand-Side Management. In Demand-Side Energy and Power Management in Data Centers: Are Data Centers Modern Societies’ Double-Edged Sword? Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2025; pp. 27–60. [Google Scholar]
  243. Henriksen, I.M.; Strömberg, H.; Branlat, J.; Diamond, L.; Garzon, G.; Kuch, D.; Yilmaz, S.; Motnikar, L. The role of gender, age, and income in demand-side management acceptance: A literature review. Energy Effic. 2025, 18, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  244. Zhu, Z.; Wang, D.; Tang, B.; Zhao, X.; Gu, G.; Yang, P.; Lai, X. Co-optimization of distributed generation, flexible load, and energy storage for promoting renewable energy consumption and power balancing in distribution networks. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2025, 238, 111124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  245. Chughtai, A.; Uqaili, M.A.; Hussain Mirjat, N.; Shaikh, F.; Khatri, S.A. Demand-side management scenario analysis for the energy-efficient future of Pakistan: Bridging the gap between market interests and national priorities. Front. Energy Res. 2024, 12, 1391973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  246. Pang, C.; Kezunovic, M.; Ehsani, M. Demand side management by using electric vehicles as distributed energy resources. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International Electric Vehicle Conference, Greenville, SC, USA, 4–8 March 2012; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  247. Pinto, G.; Deltetto, D.; Capozzoli, A. Data-driven district energy management with surrogate models and deep reinforcement learning. Appl. Energy 2021, 304, 117642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  248. Lindroos, T.J.; Ikäheimo, J. Profitability of Demand Side Management Systems Under Growing Shares of Wind and Solar in Power Systems; Taylor & Francis: Abingdon, UK, 2024. [Google Scholar]
  249. Elazab, R.; Abdelnaby, A.T.; Ali, A.A. Impacts of multiple demand-side management strategies on microgrids planning: A literature survey. Clean Energy 2024, 8, 36–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  250. Tang, X.; Wang, J. Deep Reinforcement Learning-Based Multi-Objective Optimization for Virtual Power Plants and Smart Grids: Maximizing Renewable Energy Integration and Grid Efficiency. Processes 2025, 13, 1809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  251. Cao, J.; Spulbar, C.; Eti, S.; Horobet, A.; Yüksel, S.; Dincer, H. Innovative approaches to green digital twin technologies of sustainable smart cities using a novel hybrid decision-making system. J. Innov. Knowl. 2025, 10, 100651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  252. Al-Qarni, A.; Al-Shehri, M.; Rahman, A.-u.; Iqbal, T.; Bakry, A.; Abdulqader, M. Integrating Smart Grids in Smart Cities for Sustainable Future. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Netw. Secur. 2025, 25, 227–237. [Google Scholar]
  253. World Economic Forum and Accenture. Artificial Intelligence’s Energy Paradox: Balancing Challenges and Opportunities; World Economic Forum: Geneva, Switzerland, 2025; White Paper. An Analysis of AI’s Rising Energy Demand, Strategies for Mitigation, and Its Dual Role in Accelerating Energy Transition; Available online: https://reports.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Artificial_Intelligences_Energy_Paradox_2025.pdf (accessed on 1 August 2025).
  254. Amoresano, A.; Andresen, C.; Borragan, G.; Celino, M.; Chinnici, M.; Hoffmann, V.; Malek, K.; Malerba, L.; Mayo-Garcia, R.; Paltrinieri, N.; et al. An analysis of the implementation of artificial intelligence in the energy sector. In An Analysis of the Implementation of Artificial Intelligence in the Energy Sector; EERA: Berlin, Germany, 2025; pp. 18–20. [Google Scholar]
  255. Shakir, M.A.; Appana, A.R.; Khalid, W.; Rajamanickam PJK, S.; Ahmad, M.I. Advancing insights into building electrical energy consumption: A comprehensive review of conventional and artificial intelligence methods. Adv. Build. Energy Res. 2025, 1–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  256. Amini, M.; Baradaran Rohani, M. The Role of Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence in Enhancing Renewable Energy through Data Science. World J. Technol. Sci. Res. 2024, 12, 2341–2365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  257. Alatalo, J.; Heilimo, E.; Rantonen, M.; Väänänen, O.; Sipola, T. Reducing emissions using artificial intelligence in the energy sector: A scoping review. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  258. Alomari, M.A.; Al-Andoli, M.N.; Ghaleb, M.; Thabit, R.; Alkawsi, G.; Alsayaydeh, J.A.J.; Gaid, A.S.A. Security of smart grid: Cybersecurity issues, potential cyberattacks, major incidents, and future directions. Energies 2025, 18, 141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  259. Paul, B.; Sarker, A.; Abhi, S.H.; Das, S.K.; Ali, M.F.; Islam, M.M.; Islam, M.R.; Moyeen, S.I.; Badal, M.F.R.; Ahamed, M.H.; et al. Potential smart grid vulnerabilities to cyber attacks: Current threats and existing mitigation strategies. Heliyon 2024, 10, e019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  260. Sophos. State of Ransomware in Critical Infrastructure 2024; Sophos Ltd.: Abingdon, UK, 2024; Available online: https://assets.sophos.com/X24WTUEQ/at/75tnw38cqsnrrv56wpwc78k/sophos-state-of-ransomware-critical-infrastructure-2024.pdf (accessed on 29 July 2025).
  261. Aljohani, T.; Almutairi, A. Modeling time-varying wide-scale distributed denial of service attacks on electric vehicle charging Stations. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2024, 15, 102860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  262. Behdadnia, T.; Thoelen, K.; Deconinck, G. Early-Stage Anomaly Detection in IT-OT Power Grid Communication Networks Using Wavelet Transform and Hybrid Deep Learning. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid. 2025, 16, 3305–3322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  263. Nasir, Q.; Talib, M.A.; Arshad, M.A.; Ishak, T.; Berrim, R.; Alsaid, B.; Badway, Y.; Waraga, O.A. Comparison of deep learning algorithms for site detection of false data injection attacks in smart grids. Energy Inform. 2024, 7, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  264. Wang, J.; Chen, H.; Si, Y.; Zhu, Y.; Zhu, T.; Yin, S.; Liu, B. FDIA localization and classification detection in smart grids using multi-modal data and deep learning technique. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2024, 119, 109572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  265. Priyadarsini, M.; Sonekar, N. A CNN-based approach for anomaly detection in smart grid systems. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2025, 238, 111077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  266. Zhang, J.; Zhou, K.; Wang, L.; Yang, Y.; Li, Y. Detection framework of FDIA for smart grid based on mode decomposition and gradient boosting decision. J. Electr. Eng. Technol. 2025, 20, 3601–3623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  267. Anwar, S.; Kanwal, S.; Essa, S.; Abbas, S.; Meisam, K.M.; Amin, W. Detecting False Data Injection Attacks in Smart Grids Using Machine Learning: A Comparative Study. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Smart Electrical Grid and Renewable Energy, Suzhou, China, 9–12 August 2024; pp. 509–515. [Google Scholar]
  268. Gao, Z.; Wang, J.; Illindala, M. Intrusion detection system with updated structure and feature selection algorithm for man-in-the-middle attacks in the smart grid. IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 2025, 61, 8150–8157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  269. Kandasamy, V.; Roseline, A.A. Harnessing advanced hybrid deep learning model for real-time detection and prevention of man-in-the-middle cyber attacks. Sci. Rep. 2025, 15, 1697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  270. Qiao, Y.; Chen, D.; Sun, Q.Z.; Tian, G.; Wang, W. Unveiling stealthy man-in-the-middle cyber-attacks on energy performance in grid-interactive smart buildings. Energy Convers. Manag. 2024, 319, 118949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  271. Ahn, B.; Jenkins, A.M.; Kim, T.; Zeng, J.; McLauchlan, L.; Park, S.-w. Exploring ransomware attacks on smart inverters. In Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE Energy Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE), Nashville, TN, USA, 29 October–2 November 2023; pp. 1567–1573. [Google Scholar]
  272. Alvee, S.R.B.; Ahn, B.; Kim, T.; Su, Y.; Youn, Y.-W.; Ryu, M.-H. Ransomware attack modeling and artificial intelligence-based ransomware detection for digital substations. In Proceedings of the 2021 6th IEEE Workshop on the Electronic Grid (eGRID), New Orleans, LA, USA, 8–10 November 2021; pp. 01–05. [Google Scholar]
  273. Benmalek, M. Ransomware on cyber-physical systems: Taxonomies, case studies, security gaps, and open challenges. Internet Things Cyber-Phys. Syst. 2024, 4, 186–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  274. Basnet, M.; Poudyal, S.; Ali, M.H.; Dasgupta, D. Ransomware detection using deep learning in the SCADA system of electric vehicle charging station. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE PES Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference—Latin America (ISGT Latin America), Lima, Peru, 15–17 September 2021; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  275. Bao, K.; Chau, S.C.-K.; Elbez, G.; Liu, Q.; Hagenmeyer, V. Advanced persistent threats on consumer energy resources in decentralized energy systems. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM International Conference on Future and Sustainable Energy Systems, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 17–20 June 2025; pp. 838–845. [Google Scholar]
  276. Kanjow, S. Advanced Persistent Threats (APT) in the Energy Sector. 2025. Available online: https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1972349/FULLTEXT01.pdf (accessed on 1 August 2025).
  277. Aydın, Z. Detecting cybersecurity threats in digital energy systems using deep learning for imbalanced datasets. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 2025, 15, 614–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  278. Idima, S.; Nwaga, P.; Evah, P. Comprehensive analysis of SCADA system data for intrusion detection using machine learning. Glob. J. Eng. Technol. Adv. 2025, 22, 64–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  279. Jeje, M.O. Cybersecurity assessment of smart grid exposure using a machine learning based approach. arXiv 2025, arXiv:2501.14175. [Google Scholar]
  280. Zheng, H.; Li, X.; Li, F. Unsupervised cyberattack detection in smart grids: A novel approach integrating horizontal federated learning for the control center and substations. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2025, 264, 111444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  281. Ahmed, I.S.; Ahmed, A.L.; Kamalrudin, M.; Musa, M. Integrating Cybersecurity into Renewable Energy Development: A Data-Driven Decision Tree Approach for Environmental Protection. J. Cybersecur. Inf. Manag. 2025, 15, 2. [Google Scholar]
  282. Almalawi, A.; Hassan, S.; Fahad, A.; Iqbal, A.; Khan, A.I. Hybrid cybersecurity for asymmetric threats: Intrusion detection and SCADA system protection innovations. Symmetry 2025, 17, 616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  283. Rahman, M.M.; Chayan, M.M.H.; Mehrin, K.; Sultana, A.; Hamed, M.M. Explainable deep learning for cyber attack detection in electric vehicle charging stations. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Networking, Systems, and Security, Khulna, Bangladesh, 19–21 December 2024; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  284. Faheem, M.; Al-Khasawneh, M.A.; Khan, A.A.; Madni, S.H.H. Cyberattack patterns in blockchain-based communication networks for distributed renewable energy systems: A study on big datasets. Data Brief 2024, 53, 110212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  285. Trivedi, R.; Patra, S.; Khadem, S. Data-centric explainable artificial intelligence techniques for cyber-attack detection in microgrid networks. Energy Rep. 2025, 13, 217–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  286. Sun, H.; Guo, Q.; Shen, X.; Xue, Y.; Shahidehpour, M.; Hatziargyriou, N. Energy internet: Redefinition and categories. Energy Internet 2024, 1, 3–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  287. Fawaz, A.; Mougharbel, I.; Kanaan, H.Y. Power routing algorithms: A comparative study. In Proceedings of the 2023 6th International Conference on Renewable Energy for Developing Countries (REDEC), Zouk Mosbeh, Lebanon, 5–7 July 2023; pp. 139–144. [Google Scholar]
  288. Rikiya, A.; Tanaka, K.; Van Triet, N. Digital Grid in Japan. In The Energy Internet; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 241–264. [Google Scholar]
  289. Ma, J.; Song, L.; Li, Y. Optimal power dispatching for local area packetized power network. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2017, 9, 4765–4776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  290. Guo, Y.; Lin, H.; Sun, H. Energy Internet: A Standardization-Based Blueprint Design. arXiv 2024, arXiv:2409.05189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  291. Mubarak, A.; Ishfaq, H.; Amin, W.; Shi, X.; Duvvuri, S.S.S.S.; Saleem, M.A.; Raju, K.N. FPGA-Driven Secure Energy Routing and Attack Detection in Decentralized Microgrids With SREM-Based Dynamic Path Optimization. IEEE Trans. Consum. Electron. 2025, 71, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  292. Tsoukalas, L.H.; Gao, R. From smart grids to an energy internet: Assumptions, architectures and requirements. In Proceedings of the 2008 Third International Conference on Electric Utility Deregulation and Restructuring and Power Technologies, Nanjing, China, 6–9 April 2008; pp. 94–98. [Google Scholar]
  293. Hebal, S.; Mechta, D.; Harous, S.; Louail, L. A comparative study of energy routing algorithms to optimize energy transmission in energy internet. J. Supercomput. 2024, 80, 20583–20639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  294. Jiang, X.; Sun, C.; Cao, L.; Law, N.; Loo, K.H. Review and comparative study of energy routing algorithms for energy internet. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE 5th Conference on Energy Internet and Energy System Integration (EI2), Taiyuan, China, 22–24 October 2021; pp. 567–572. [Google Scholar]
  295. Abdella, J.; Shuaib, K.; Harous, S. Energy routing algorithms for the energy internet. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Intelligent Systems (IS), Madeira, Portugal, 25–27 September 2018; pp. 80–86. [Google Scholar]
  296. Hebal, S.; Harous, S.; Mechta, D. Energy routing challenges and protocols in energy internet: A survey. J. Electr. Eng. Technol. 2021, 16, 3197–3212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  297. Joseph, A.; Balachandra, P. Energy internet, the future electricity system: Overview, concept, model structure, and mechanism. Energies 2020, 13, 4242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  298. Ma, J.; Zhang, N.; Shen, X. Elastic energy distribution of local area packetized power networks to mitigate distribution level load fluctuation. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 8219–8231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  299. Chen, M.; Xia, M.; Chen, Q. Hierarchical structure design and primary energy dispatching strategy of net energy router. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2021, 201, 107539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  300. Chen, M.; Xia, M.; Chen, Q. Planning model for energy routers considering peer-to-peer energy transactions among multiple distribution networks. CSEE J. Power Energy Syst. 2022, 10, 1026–1043. [Google Scholar]
  301. Abe, R. Digital Grid: New Internet-Like Multi-Directional Power Supply; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  302. Schneider, K.; Wiegel, F.; Schulz, D.; Hagenmeyer, V.; Hiller, M.; Bless, R.; Zitterbart, M. Designing the interplay of energy plane and communication plane in the energy packet grid. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE 46th Conference on Local Computer Networks (LCN), Edmonton, AB, Canada, 4–7 October 2021; pp. 331–334. [Google Scholar]
  303. Schulz, D.; Schneider, K.; Weßbecher, M.; Hagenmeyer, V.; Zitterbart, M.; Hiller, M. Composing power flow patterns through coordinated dispatch of energy packets. In Proceedings of the 2023 8th IEEE Workshop on the Electronic Grid (eGRID), Karlsruhe, Germany, 16–18 October 2023; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  304. Schneider, K.; Weßbecher, M.; Schulz, D.; Hagenmeyer, V.; Hiller, M.; Zitterbart, M. Modes of energy packets in the energy packet grid. In Proceedings of the 2023 8th IEEE Workshop on the Electronic Grid (eGRID), Karlsruhe, Germany, 16–18 October 2023; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  305. Schulz, D.; Schneider, K.; Weßbecher, M.; Hagenmeyer, V.; Zitterbart, M.; Hiller, M. Hardware realization of participants in an energy packet-based power grid. In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE 13th International Symposium on Power Electronics for Distributed Generation Systems (PEDG), Kiel, Germany, 26–29 June 2022; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  306. Liu, B.; Wu, W.; Zhou, C.; Mao, C.; Wang, D.; Duan, Q.; Sha, G. An AC–DC hybrid multi-port energy router with coordinated control and energy management strategies. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 109069–109082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  307. Dudko, A.; Endrjukaite, T.; Roose, L.R. Open routed energy distribution network based on a concept of energy router in smart grid. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Information Integration and Web-Based Applications & Services, Munich, Germany, 2–4 December 2019; pp. 483–491. [Google Scholar]
  308. Zhou, J.; Wang, J. Research review on multi-port energy routers adapted to renewable energy access. Electronics 2024, 13, 1493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  309. Fawaz, A.; Mougharbel, I.; Al-Haddad, K.; Kanaan, H.Y. Energy routing protocols for Energy Internet: A review on multi-agent systems, metaheuristics, and Artificial Intelligence approaches. IEEE Access 2025, 13, 41625–41643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  310. Jiang, X.; Sun, C.; Cao, L.; Law, N.; Loo, K.H. Semi-decentralized energy routing algorithm for minimum-loss transmission in community energy internet. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2022, 135, 107547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  311. Shahzad, K.; Iqbal, S. A reliable graph-based routing algorithm in residential multi-microgrid systems. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Frontiers of Information Technology (FIT), Islamabad, Pakistan, 12–13 December 2022; pp. 71–76. [Google Scholar]
  312. Razi, R.; Pham, M.-C.; Hably, A.; Bacha, S.; Tran, Q.-T.; Iman-Eini, H. A novel graph-based routing algorithm in residential multimicrogrid systems. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 2020, 17, 1774–1784. [Google Scholar]
  313. Wang, R.; Wu, J.; Qian, Z.; Lin, Z.; He, X. A graph theory based energy routing algorithm in energy local area network. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 2017, 13, 3275–3285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  314. Hussain, S.S.; Aftab, M.A.; Nadeem, F.; Ali, I.; Ustun, T.S. Optimal energy routing in microgrids with IEC 61850 based energy routers. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2019, 67, 5161–5169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  315. Wang, Y.; Zhang, Y. Energy routing strategy based on minimum loss and transaction price. In Proceedings of the 2022 41st Chinese Control Conference (CCC), Hefei, China, 25–27 July 2022; pp. 6073–6078. [Google Scholar]
  316. Koottappillil, D.P.; Naidoo, R.M.; Mbungu, N.T.; Bansal, R.C. Distribution of renewable energy through the energy internet: A routing algorithm for energy routers. Energy Rep. 2022, 8, 355–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  317. Guo, H.; Wang, F.; Li, L.; Zhang, L.; Luo, J. A minimum loss routing algorithm based on real-time transaction in energy internet. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 2019, 15, 6446–6456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  318. Guo, H.; Wang, F.; James, G.; Zhang, L.; Luo, J. Graph theory based topology design and energy routing control of the energy internet. IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 2018, 12, 4507–4514. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  319. Forootan, M.M.; Larki, I.; Zahedi, R.; Ahmadi, A. Machine learning and deep learning in energy systems: A review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  320. Perera, A.T.D.; Kamalaruban, P. Applications of reinforcement learning in energy systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 137, 110618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  321. Fawaz, A.; Mougharbel, I.; Kanaan, H.Y. Efficient low-cost method for the estimation of clouds shading rate on PV farms-real-time reconfiguration application. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE 30th International Symposium on Industrial Electronics (ISIE), Kyoto, Japan, 20–23 June 2021; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  322. Hua, H.; Qin, Y.; Hao, C.; Cao, J. Optimal energy management strategies for energy Internet via deep reinforcement learning approach. Appl. Energy 2019, 239, 598–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  323. Yang, G.; Cao, J.; Hua, H.; Zhou, Z. Deep learning-based distributed optimal control for wide area energy Internet. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Energy Internet (ICEI), Beijing, China, 21–25 May 2018; pp. 292–297. [Google Scholar]
  324. Wang, D.-L.; Sun, Q.-Y.; Li, Y.-Y.; Liu, X.-R. Optimal energy routing design in energy internet with multiple energy routing centers using artificial neural network-based reinforcement learning method. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  325. Benchikh, L.; Louail, L.; Mechta, D. Subscriber matching in energy internet using the firefly algorithm. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Innovations in Computing Research (ICR’23); Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2023; pp. 418–432. [Google Scholar]
  326. Benchikh, L.; Louail, L.; Mechta, D.; Nacef, A. Optimal path selection and producer allocation for energy distribution in energy Internet. In Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference on Networking and Advanced Systems (ICNAS), Algiers, Algeria, 21–23 October 2023; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  327. Nacef, A.; Mechta, D.; Louail, L.; Harous, S. Genetic algorithm-based path selection for power-efficient energy routing in smart grids and energy internet. In Proceedings of the 2023 2nd International Engineering Conference on Electrical, Energy, and Artificial Intelligence (EICEEAI), Zarqa, Jordan, 27–28 December 2023; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
  328. Hua, H.; Shi, J.; Chen, X.; Qin, Y.; Wang, B.; Yu, K.; Naidoo, P. Carbon emission flow based energy routing strategy in energy Internet. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 2023, 20, 3974–3985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  329. Mubarak, A.; Amin, W.; Shi, X. Energy Efficiency Optimization in Vehicle Communication Network Using Hybrid-Genetic Algorithm. Trans. Emerg. Telecommun. Technol. 2025, 36, e70146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  330. Hebal, S.; Mechta, D.; Harous, S.; Dhriyyef, M. Hybrid energy routing approach for energy internet. Energies 2021, 14, 2579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  331. Mechta, D.; Harous, S.; Hebal, S. Energy-efficient path-aware routing Protocol based on PSO for Smart Grids. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Conference on Electro Information Technology (EIT), Chicago, IL, USA, 31 July–1 August 2020; pp. 093–097. [Google Scholar]
  332. Ye, H.; Wen, S.; Zhu, M.; Lin, A.; Pan, A.; Liu, Z.; Dong, Z.; Liu, J. Virtual Energy Routing Strategy for Energy Internet with Renewable Energy. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE 12th Energy Conversion Congress & Exposition-Asia (ECCE-Asia), Singapore, 24–27 May 2021; pp. 1459–1463. [Google Scholar]
  333. Alhasnawi, B.N.; Jasim, B.H.; Rahman, Z.-A.S.A.; Guerrero, J.M.; Esteban, M.D. A novel internet of energy based optimal multi-agent control scheme for microgrid including renewable energy resources. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 8146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  334. Hu, J.; Cong, H.; Jiang, C. Coordinated scheduling model of power system with active distribution networks based on multi-agent system. J. Mod. Power Syst. Clean Energy 2018, 6, 521–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  335. Luo, F.; Dong, Z.Y.; Murata, J.; Xu, Z. A distributed trading system in active distribution networks based on multi-agent coalition and Blockchain. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2018, 34, 4097–4108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  336. Fawaz, A.; Mougharbel, I.; Kanaan, H.Y. Q-Learning Routing Protocol Applied to Energy Internet for Power Distribution. In Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE 17th International Conference on Compatibility, Power Electronics and Power Engineering (CPE-POWERENG), Tallinn, Estonia, 14–16 June 2023; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  337. Li, S.; Cao, D.; Hu, W.; Huang, Q.; Chen, Z.; Blaabjerg, F. Multi-energy management of interconnected multi-microgrid system using multi-agent deep reinforcement learning. J. Mod. Power Syst. Clean Energy 2023, 11, 1606–1617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  338. Kanwal, S.; Amin, W.; Khan, A.A.; Rafique, B.; Huang, Q.; Jian, L.; Batool, I. Enhanced cybersecurity for smart grids: Detecting protocol-specific DDoS attacks on Modbus networks. Comput. Electr. Eng. 2025, 127, 110629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  339. Cui, L.; Qu, Y.; Gao, L.; Xie, G.; Yu, S. Detecting false data attacks using machine learning techniques in smart grid: A survey. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2020, 170, 102808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  340. Sayghe, A.; Hu, Y.; Zografopoulos, I.; Liu, X.; Dutta, R.G.; Jin, Y.; Konstantinou, C. Survey of machine learning methods for detecting false data injection attacks in power systems. IET Smart Grid 2020, 3, 581–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  341. Olaitan, O.F.; Ayeni, S.O.; Olosunde, A.; Okeke, F.C.; Okonkwo, U.U.; Ochieze, C.G.; Chukwujama, O.V.; Akatakpo, O.N. Quantum Computing in Artificial Intelligence: A Review of Quantum Machine Learning Algorithms. Path Sci. 2025, 11, 7001–7009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  342. He, Z.; Amaro, D.; Shaydulin, R.; Pistoia, M. Performance of quantum approximate optimization with quantum error detection. Commun. Phys. 2025, 8, 217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  343. Kottahachchi Kankanamge Don, A.; Khalil, I. Q-SupCon: Quantum-enhanced supervised contrastive learning architecture within the representation learning framework. ACM Trans. Quantum Comput. 2025, 6, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  344. Ahanger, T.A.; Bhatia, M.; Aldaej, A. Quantum informative analysis in smart power distribution. ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol. 2024, 15, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  345. Siddi Moreau, G.; Pisani, L.; Profir, M.; Podda, C.; Leoni, L.; Cao, G. Quantum Artificial Intelligence Scalability in the NISQ Era: Pathways to Quantum Utility. Adv. Quantum Technol. 2024, 7, 2400716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  346. How, M.-L.; Cheah, S.-M. Forging the future: Strategic approaches to quantum AI integration for industry transformation. AI 2024, 5, 290–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  347. Golec, M.; Hatay, E.S.; Golec, M.; Uyar, M.; Golec, M.; Gill, S.S. Quantum cloud computing: Trends and challenges. J. Econ. Technol. 2024, 2, 190–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Flow diagram showing study selection process.
Figure 1. Flow diagram showing study selection process.
Energies 18 04747 g001
Figure 2. Overview of smart grid.
Figure 2. Overview of smart grid.
Energies 18 04747 g002
Figure 3. Important factors of transmission and distribution.
Figure 3. Important factors of transmission and distribution.
Energies 18 04747 g003
Figure 4. Energy utilization strategies in smart grid.
Figure 4. Energy utilization strategies in smart grid.
Energies 18 04747 g004
Figure 5. Electricity utilization in AI life cycle.
Figure 5. Electricity utilization in AI life cycle.
Energies 18 04747 g005
Figure 6. Root causes of attacks on energy utilization.
Figure 6. Root causes of attacks on energy utilization.
Energies 18 04747 g006
Figure 7. Methods used for recovery in energy utilization.
Figure 7. Methods used for recovery in energy utilization.
Energies 18 04747 g007
Figure 8. Infection Range Percentage in Energy Utilization.
Figure 8. Infection Range Percentage in Energy Utilization.
Energies 18 04747 g008
Figure 9. Energy Internet architecture.
Figure 9. Energy Internet architecture.
Energies 18 04747 g009
Figure 10. Energy Router general architecture.
Figure 10. Energy Router general architecture.
Energies 18 04747 g010
Figure 11. Energy Internet model with Energy Routers between microgrids.
Figure 11. Energy Internet model with Energy Routers between microgrids.
Energies 18 04747 g011
Figure 12. Energy-routing approaches.
Figure 12. Energy-routing approaches.
Energies 18 04747 g012
Figure 13. Attack deployment in smart grid [338].
Figure 13. Attack deployment in smart grid [338].
Energies 18 04747 g013
Table 1. Summary of relevant research.
Table 1. Summary of relevant research.
ReferencesModel/Method UsedDataset/RegionMain Contribution
[1]GIS + Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)Satellite solar maps, terrain and land-use dataDesigned a GIS-based solar site selection framework using AHP to identify optimal PV deployment zones.
[2]Earth System Models (ESMs)Multi-model solar/wind projections (Global)Reviewed long-term climate model outputs to assess how resource availability will shift under future climate scenarios.
[3]Artificial Neural Network (ANN)Meteorological and power data (2022)Developed a hybrid ANN model for forecasting solar and wind availability in real time to support hybrid system planning.
[4]Numerical Weather Prediction (NWP) + LSTMSolar radiation and weather forecasts (Regional)Combined deep learning with weather models to significantly improve short-term solar irradiance forecasting.
[5]Empirical SCADA Data Publication6 Chinese wind/solar farms (2019–2020)Published a large, real-world dataset with synchronized SCADA and environmental data for model training/validation.
Table 2. Summary of relevant research: technological efficiency.
Table 2. Summary of relevant research: technological efficiency.
ReferencesMethodology/Model UsedDataset/RegionMain ContributionPerformance Metrics/Results
[6]XGBoost, CatBoost, LightGBM, LSTMReal-time solar/wind dataDeveloped hybrid ML/DL models to predict solar and wind power generationAchieved an average error rate of 8.02% in power prediction
[7]AI-based optimization techniques-Reviewed AI methods for optimizing offshore wind turbine towers, focusing on structural efficiency and cost reduction.-
[8]Thermodynamic cycle analysisCombined-cycle power plantApplied thermodynamic analysis to optimize efficiency in combined-cycle power plants.Achieved a 1.8% improvement in thermal efficiency.
[9]Digital-twin modelingTetraSpar prototype dataProposed a validated digital-twin solution for floating offshore wind turbines.Estimated damage equivalent loads with 10–15% accuracy.
[10]Physics-informed neural networksSCADA data from 4 turbinesImplemented PINNs for accurate wind-turbine power forecasting with uncertainty quantification.Mean Absolute Error (MAE) of 3.9% in power prediction.
Table 3. Summary of relevant studies: environmental and climatic conditions.
Table 3. Summary of relevant studies: environmental and climatic conditions.
ReferencesMethodologyDataset and RegionMain ContributionPerformance Metrics/Results
[11]Capacity-derating modelsPJM and SERC regions (eastern U.S.)Developed a framework to assess the impact of extreme summer droughts on hydro and thermal power plants.Found a 19–29% decrease in usable capacity during severe drought.
[9]Power dispatch and capacity expansion modelsItaly (future 2030 projections)Investigated the impact of extreme weather on thermal generation and hydropower systems, highlighting the need for solar and wind integration.Projected a 5–8 GW increase in PV capacity required by 2030 to cope with extreme weather.
[12]Electricity shadow price analysisEuropean reanalysis data (40 years)Identified weather-induced extreme events and multi-day renewable energy shortages using electricity shadow prices derived from long-term reanalysis data.Found that multi-day weather events, rather than single events, were responsible for the majority of renewable energy shortages.
[13]Post-processing of market modelsEurope (electricity market data)Analyzed the dual impact of climate change on electricity demand and hydropower generation in Europe.LOLE reduction by 50% due to decreased heating demand, but increased LOLE due to hydrological changes.
Table 4. Summary of relevant research: policy and regulatory framework.
Table 4. Summary of relevant research: policy and regulatory framework.
ReferencesMethodologyDatasetMain ContributionFindings
[14]Econometric modeling and policy evaluationPanel data from 109 countries over 30 yearsEvaluated the static and dynamic effects of four national climate and energy policies carbon tax, ETS, renewable energy standards, and energy-efficiency programs on CO2 emissions in the electricity generation sector.Found that a combination of policies is more effective than individual measures. Recommended integrating various policy instruments to achieve significant emissions reductions in the power sector.
[17]Policy analysis and comparative studyNational climate laws and energy security performance dataExamined the short- and long-term impacts of national climate laws and policies on energy security performance (ESP).Found that well-designed climate policies can enhance energy security by promoting the diversification of energy sources and improving infrastructure resilience. However, the effectiveness of these policies depends on their design, implementation, and the political and economic context in which they are applied.
[18]Policy review and analysisFinancial and political factors aiding climate legislationExplored how financial and political factors aid climate legislation and policies for renewable energy transition.Identified key policy instruments, such as subsidies, tax incentives, and renewable energy targets, that have been effective in promoting the adoption of renewable energy technologies. Discussed challenges and barriers to policy implementation, including political opposition, economic constraints, and social acceptance.
[19]Policy analysis and framework developmentEnergy-transition initiatives in Latin America and the CaribbeanExamined incentive mechanisms for both grid-scale and distributed generation in Latin America and the Caribbean.Highlighted the importance of clear and stable regulatory frameworks in attracting investment in renewable energy projects. Discussed the role of public-private partnerships and the need for capacity building in regulatory institutions to effectively implement and enforce policies.
Table 5. Summary of relevant research: grid and storage integration.
Table 5. Summary of relevant research: grid and storage integration.
StudyMethodologyContribution
[22]Review of HESS components and control strategiesExplored the integration of multiple storage technologies
[23]Co-optimization modeling of storage and transmission planningInvestigated the impact of storage on transmission expansion
[25]Evaluation of LDES capacity mandatesAnalyzed the benefits of LDES for grid stability
[26]Development of priority charging algorithmsProposed a weather-driven charging strategy for battery systems
[27]Analysis of battery-storage deployment trendsAssessed the growth of grid-scale battery storage
Table 6. Summary of relevant research: geopolitical and social factors.
Table 6. Summary of relevant research: geopolitical and social factors.
StudyMethodologyDataset/ScopeContributionKey Results
[28]Econometric modelingCross-country energy market and policy dataShowed geopolitical risk hampers energy transition via supply-chain disruptionRobust regulatory and industry infrastructure mitigate negative impacts
[29]Qualitative case studyGermany’s energy-transition policiesProvided insights from Germany’s Energiewende on policy balancingGreen policies enhance renewables but require careful geopolitical coordination
[30]ML-based sentiment analysis68,828 tweets on wind energy in NorwayHighlighted how social opposition can delay wind project deploymentNegative sentiment increased 2018–2020, underscoring the need for public engagement
[31]Game-theoretic modelingGlobal renewable energy trade and policy dataIllustrated the influence of geopolitical and economic strategiesStrategic investment/sprawl enhances renewables; cooperation ensures balanced growth
Table 7. Summary of studies addressing cyberattacks in power generation.
Table 7. Summary of studies addressing cyberattacks in power generation.
StudyModelDatasetContributionPerformance
[34]GNNIEEE-68 busFDIA detection & localization95% accuracy
[35]PCA-DL + Decision TreePMU Time-SeriesDisturbance vs. cyber-attack detection97% accuracy
[36]SVMIEEE 14/57/118Improved accuracy with feature selection97% accuracy
[37]DQNPolish 2383-busAttack strategy learning-
[38]RFICS logsAdversarial attack vulnerability94% precision
[39]Stacked CNN+LSTMPower SCADA systemsImproved detection via ensemble99.99% accuracy
[40]AESWATDL approaches in ICS0.9798
[41]DL IDS pipelineCPS benchmark6-step CPS security framework-
[42]StackMean, StackMax, StackRFWUSTL-IIOT-2021Balanced & resilient detectionAccuracy: StackMean: 99.99, StackMax: 99.99, StackRF: 99.99
[43]AEPower SCADA systemsAdversarial evasion vulnerability100% precision and 100% recall
[44]LSTM + GNNIEEE-39FDIA via prediction errorsAUC: 0.9857
[45]Streaming EnsembleNY grid PMUReal-time FDIA detection-
[46]PowerFDNet (CNN + GNN)SimBenchSpatiotemporal DL-based PowerFDNet for SFDIA detectionPrecision: 99.324 Recall: 99.209 F1: 99.267
[47]MERSIEEE-39False alarm mitigation in AC-SE96% accuracy
[48]AEIEEE-118PMU anomaly reconstructionTPR: 93.6%
[49]GSP + K-meansIEEE 14-BUS systemsReal-time FDIA via graph signal processing-
[50]DNN (Transfer Learning)IEEE-14/118Robustness to modeling errorsAccuracy: 99.99%
[51]Graph Hybrid(CNN+LSTM)IEEE-39Temporal and topological FDIA detection<90%
[52]MARLSimulated inverter gridMARL to defend against stealthy FDIAs-
[53]MTD-DNNIEEE bus systemsMoving target defense (topology randomization)Accuracy: 99%
[54]SMDAE + GANIEEE-118 + realLoad forecasting under FDIA∼98% accuracy
[55]CGANIEEE-57/118Stealthy FDIA simulation for trainingSuccess rate: 96%
[62]State-space + SMO + H controlRenewable-rich LFC gridSeparate/mitigate control vs. measurement FDIA∼30% AE MSE reduction, improved stability
[56]LSTM + AAEIEEE 13 & 123Unsupervised FDIA detectionAccuracy: 99.5% (IEEE 13), 99.6% (IEEE 123)
[63]LSTM from partial observationsIEEE test systemsAttack localization + state reconstruction-
[57]Multi-model fusion (LSTM+AE)LFC microgridReal-time FDIA & load-switching detection99.4% accuracy; <0.12 s delay
[58]Federated LSTM+GCNIEEE 57/118/300Decentralized FDIA detection with privacyF1: 97–98%
[59]RMT + SVD CNNIEEE 14 & 57Replay vs. FDIA differentiationAccuracy: 100% (IEEE 14), 95.98% (IEEE 57)
[60]Median filtering (MF)IEEE 30LFC resilience strategy against FDIA-
[61]CP-FBLSIEEE 34 & 123FDIA detection/localization via CP-FBLS98.43% accuracy, 0.34 ms detection
Table 8. Summary of studies addressing grid security.
Table 8. Summary of studies addressing grid security.
MethodUsed TechniquesDescriptionReferences
Supervised LearningClassification, regressionLearns by harnessing labeled input-output data to fit models that make predictions. Typical of email filtering, demand forecasting, and diagnostics. [96,97]
Unsupervised LearningClustering, associationTests the patterns and groupings in data sets with no predefined labels. Commonly used in anomaly detection and data segmentation. [98,99]
Reinforcement LearningSequential decision makingLearns optimal actions with interactions with an environment. Tries to garner as much mutual gains in the long run, usually has a Markov Decision Processes model. [100,101,102]
Dynamic ProgrammingDerivation of optimal policyDivides complex tasks into solvable subproblems that are solved recursively. It is appropriate in cases where models of the systems are clear and where policies have to be optimized. [103,104]
Monte Carlo MethodsValue-estimation methodsBy random sampling, approximates returns/outcomes. Performs well on simulation-based settings but prone to the quality and overfitting concerns in samples. [105,106]
Temporal Difference MethodsOnline learning, partial feedbackLearns online without waiting until the end of the situation to know an outcome, or the outcome of learning is incomplete. Composes Monte Carlo ideas with dynamic programming to carry out adaptive predictions. [107,108]
Deep Q-Network (DQN)High-dimensional state controlApplies the principles of deep learning to generalize Q-values in large or continuous spaces and allow for adaptation in complex environments, making decisions when facing extreme phenomena. [109,110]
Bayesian MethodsProbabilistic modeling of uncertainty, decision uncertaintyApplies Bayesian probability in estimating certain uncertainties and, therefore, decision making, particularly when dealing with limited or noisy data. [111,112]
Support Vector Machine (SVM)Classification, regressionSeeks the optimal hyperplane between the classes, which supports linear and nonlinear classification by the use of kernel methods.
Decision TreeInterpretable rule-based modelingTree-based decisions are constructed as a sequence of rule-based splits. Simple and interpretable, normally used in classification. [113,114]
Table 9. Comparative analysis of model in detection of cyberattacks (T&D).
Table 9. Comparative analysis of model in detection of cyberattacks (T&D).
ModelsAttack TypeLearning ObjectiveStrengths (+)
DQDN [163]False Data InjectionDerive optimal defense using sliding window over observation space(+) Performs better than existing models in IEEE bus systems
DPDG [164]DDoSMonitor and manage network traffic to retain bandwidth(+) Effective traffic analysis and filtering strategy
DPDG [165]False Data InjectionDetermine re-close timing after FDI attacks(+) Considers generator rotor behavior changes post-attack
Actor-Critic NN [166]Multiple Attack TypesLearn dynamic defense by observing CPS states in real-time(+) Enables real-time operation (+) Learns optimal defense and attack strategies
POMDP [167]DoS, FDI, JammingMinimize false alarms and detection delay by optimal action selection(+) Operates online (+) Model-free approach
Q-learning [168]Multiple ZigBee AttacksIdentify ideal actions to prevent ZigBee network threats(+) Evaluated across six attack types (+) Combines detection and prevention using ML
Inverse RL [169]Back-off AttackGeneral defense using Generative Adversarial Imitation Learning(+) Works in both offline and live settings (+) Combines attack detection and prevention
DQN [170]JammingLearn frequency patterns to optimize spectrum selection(+) SINR and switching cost-aware (+) Reduces detection time and false alarms
Q-learning [171]DoS AmplificationAlleviate DNS congestion post-amplification attacks(+) Based on real DNS amplification scenarios
POMDP [172]False Data InjectionMaintain optimal power flow and improve grid resilience(+) Uses Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) for effective recovery
Table 10. Comparison table of energy utilization strategies in smart grids.
Table 10. Comparison table of energy utilization strategies in smart grids.
TechnologyDescriptionComponents/ToolsAdvantagesLimitations
Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI)Real-time monitoring of energy consumption and grid conditions with two-way communicationSmart meters, communication networks, data management systemsGranular consumption insights, remote meter reading, improved billing accuracyPrivacy concerns, high deployment costs, data management complexity
Renewable Energy IntegrationIncorporation of variable renewable sources (solar PV, wind, hydropower) into the gridSolar PVs, wind turbines, hydropower, forecasting, data analytics, machine learningReduces fossil fuel reliance, supports distributed energy resources, optimizes grid with forecastingVariability and intermittency, grid balancing, forecasting accuracy
Energy-Storage Systems (ESS)Storing excess energy for balancing supply and demandBatteries (Li-ion, flow), pumped hydro storageGrid stability, peak load management, reduces need for peaking plantsHigh capital costs, energy losses during storage, lifespan limits
Demand-Side Management (DSM)Strategies to influence consumer energy use for efficiency and peak load reductionDynamic pricing, smart appliances, incentivesPeak load reduction, energy efficiency, demand flexibilityRequires consumer participation, behavioral change, technology adoption
Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning (AI/ML)Advanced analytics and real-time optimization for grid managementPredictive analytics, fault-detection algorithms, energy dispatch optimizationImproved forecasting, fault prediction, optimized resource dispatchData quality, algorithm transparency, computational resources
Table 11. Summary of recent AMI research and market trends.
Table 11. Summary of recent AMI research and market trends.
StudyYearFocus/ScopeKey Findings/HighlightsMarket/Tech TrendsKey Utilities/Regions Covered
[218]2025Market forecasts and technology trendsGlobal AMI market projected to reach USD 29.63B in 2025 at 11.23% CAGR; smart-grid integration drives adoption; AI-enabled data analytics and automation improving operational efficiency; government policies promote AMI adoptionRise of smart-grid solutions; real-time data analytics; AI integration; automation for outage managementU.S., Germany, China leading smart-city initiatives
[219]2025Global survey and case studies of AMI implementationsAMI enables major utility operation changes beyond meter-to-cash; mature, standardized technologies; detailed cost/benefit and implementation data from utilities worldwideStandardized AMI functionalities; impact on utility operations and resource managementUtilities in U.S., Italy (ENEL), Brazil (Electrobras), India, Australia
[220]2025Market size and strategic insightsMarket estimated at USD 21.98B in 2024, growing to USD 24.89B in 2025, projected USD 45.48B by 2030; emphasizes regulatory and digital transformation driversDigital transformation; regulatory compliance; tariff impacts on AMI deploymentGlobal overview with emphasis on U.S. tariff impact
[221]2025Technical differentiation and solutionsAMI provides two-way, real-time communication beyond AMR; features include outage detection, demand response; improves operational efficiency and reduces laborAdvanced communication networks; real-time data collection and remote monitoringGeneral market focus with technology comparisons
Table 12. Comparison of existing studies on renewable energy integration in energy utilization.
Table 12. Comparison of existing studies on renewable energy integration in energy utilization.
Paper/SourceFocus/ScopeKey Findings/HighlightsLimitations/Challenges Identified by Paper
 [228]Optimization of grid reliability and profitability with renewables and energy-storage systems (ESS)Introduces reliable efficiency index (REI); improves grid reliability and profitability by ∼38% in tests; environmental benefits demonstratedFocuses on simulation results (IEEE 33-bus); real-world validation needed; complexity of calculations limits immediate practical adoption
 [229]Review of challenges using energy storage to mitigate renewables intermittencyHighlights critical role of ESS in enhancing grid flexibility and stability; discusses market and technical barriersLacks new experimental data; relies on review of existing literature; economic barriers remain substantial
 [230]Proposes energy hub framework optimizing multi-carrier energy systems and managing renewable uncertaintyFramework optimizes renewables integration with demand–response and storage; manages variability effectivelyModel assumptions may oversimplify real energy systems; uncertainty quantification depends on input data quality
 [231]Examines demand-side flexibility impact on renewable integration and decarbonization in regional power gridsDemonstrates demand flexibility as key to enabling higher renewable penetration and supporting low-carbon goalsCase study limited to West Inner Mongolia, may not generalize globally; data availability constraints noted
 [232]Develops optimization models balancing cost, emissions, and grid stability during integrationIncorporates uncertainty, storage, and demand response; provides robust planning tools for renewable deploymentComputational complexity limiting scalability; real-time control integration not addressed
Table 13. Comparison of existing studies: energy-storage systems in energy utilization.
Table 13. Comparison of existing studies: energy-storage systems in energy utilization.
Paper/SourceFocusKey FindingsLimitations
 [237]Integration of solar cells with energy-storage devices (batteries, supercapacitors)Reviews latest advances in material composition, system construction, and performance; addresses intermittent solar generation by integrated storageEmphasis on lab-scale and prototype systems; practical large-scale deployment and cost challenges remain open
 [238]Comprehensive categorization and description of mechanical, electrochemical, thermal ESSProvides systemic classification, explains working principles, and discusses suitability for grid and renewable integrationLacks in-depth economic analysis or real-world validation of some emerging technologies
 [239]Overview of technological advancements in high-power ESS including lithium-ion batteriesHighlights latest improvements in power density, cycle life, and applications in grid and transport sectorsFocuses mostly on lithium-ion technologies; emerging alternatives less emphasized; safety concerns noted
 [240]Explores ESS role in enhancing grid flexibility and renewable energy integrationDemonstrates grid services improvements with ESS deployment; discusses technical integration and policy frameworksImplementation barriers include high costs, regulatory uncertainty, and interoperability challenges
 [241]Reviews advances in battery ESS technologies, focusing on Li-ion and alternative chemistriesDetails technological progress in energy density, lifespan, sustainability, and safety; commercial trends trackedBattery degradation, recycling challenges, and raw material supply risks highlighted
Table 14. Comparison of existing studies addressing demand-side management in energy utilization.
Table 14. Comparison of existing studies addressing demand-side management in energy utilization.
Paper/SourceFocusKey FindingsLimitations
 [245]Development of DSM model for Pakistan analyzing multiple DSM scenarios (energy efficiency, conservation, load management)DSM can reduce electricity demand by ∼26.4% and significantly decrease GHG emissions; DSM needs institutional policy and regulatory support for effectivenessModel based on projections; practical implementation and regulatory framework lacking in Pakistan; regional focus limits generalizability
 [246]Integration of electric vehicles (EVs) with DSM to optimize peak load shifting and distributed resource allocationCombining DSM with EVs effectively shifts peak load and improves grid flexibility; optimal resource allocation enhances cost savingsLimited by assumption of EV penetration rates and grid conditions; complexities of large-scale EV integration not fully addressed
 [247]Large-scale DSM control using discrete deep reinforcement learning (DRL) for residential energy managementDRL enables scalable, adaptive load control, reducing peak demand and smoothing load profiles in smart residential districtsDRL model requires extensive data and computational resources; transferability to other regions with different load patterns not tested
 [248]Economic analysis of DSM system profitability under dynamic European electricity marketsDSM systems can be profitable under flexible pricing and market conditions; financial incentives are key to DSM adoptionProfitability sensitive to market conditions and tariff structures; analyses rely on market forecasts which can be volatile
 [249]Examines combined DSM strategies and their effect on microgrid cost control and reliabilityMultiple DSM strategies help maintain power balance and reduce operational costs without compromising reliabilityMicrogrid-scale focus limits applicability to larger grids; strategy coordination complexity may increase operational overhead
Table 15. Comparative analysis of recent research on AI in energy systems.
Table 15. Comparative analysis of recent research on AI in energy systems.
Paper/SourceFocusKey FindingsLimitations
 [253]Cross-sector review of AI’s role in energy efficiency and grid managementAI reduces energy use in buildings (9-30%), communication networks (up to 40%), and manufacturing; supports predictive maintenance, smart grid, and renewable integrationHighlights large, uncertain, and rising energy demand of AI systems and data centers; variability in projected energy savings; data privacy and ethical concerns
 [254]State-of-the-art and trends in AI for energy production/distribution, smart grid, demand response, and asset managementAI optimizes forecasting, grid management, energy efficiency, storage, and asset maintenance; advances in ML, digital twins, and predictive controlsKey challenges include data scarcity, model explainability, energy/resource footprint of AI, trust, and regulatory/licensing complexity
 [255]Review of AI and ML for building energy forecasting and system optimizationAI models outperform conventional approaches in accuracy and adaptivity; Hybrid AI-IoT methods enable real-time managementDemands large, high-quality datasets and significant computational resources; Generalization to varied building types is challenging
 [256]Comprehensive review of AI/ML in energy generation, forecasting, grid stability, predictive maintenanceAI/ML algorithms improve grid reliability, enable predictive maintenance, optimize energy storage, and reduce waste in renewable integrationIntegration is challenged by intermittency, requirement for robust real-time data, and transferability across regions and technologies
 [257]Scoping review of AI for emission reduction and energy-efficiency measuresAI enables targeted, real-time emission reduction, improved energy management, and dynamic grid balancingAccess to reliable emissions data is limited; implementation of AI at nationwide scale is complex; cybersecurity and transparency limitations
Table 16. Comparative analysis of recent research on cyberattack detection in energy systems.
Table 16. Comparative analysis of recent research on cyberattack detection in energy systems.
Paper/SourceFocusDataset(s) UsedModel(s) ProposedKey FindingsLimitations
 [277]Deep learning for cyberattack detection in energy systemsSCADA system logs (imbalanced), simulated attack dataHybrid deep learning w/feature reductionHybrid DL model improves threat detection in SCADA systems on imbalanced data; addresses spatial/temporal/structural patterns via feature reductionPerformance relies on quality of log data; practical deployment tested only on synthetic/simulated data
 [278]ML/Explainable AI for SCADA intrusion detectionSCADA wind farm operational data (real-world & simulated)CatBoost, XGBRegressor, RNN, SHAP, LIMEXAI improves trust and transparency; RNNs outperform baseline; CatBoost/XGBRegressor excel in anomaly detectionModel explainability can add computational overhead; results may not generalize across SCADA types
 [279]ML for cyber event classification in gridsMississippi State Univ./Oak Ridge National Lab datasetsXGBoost ClassifierAchieves 85% accuracy, F1 = 0.91 across cyber/physical event subdatasetsDataset scope limited to North American grid scenarios; data labeling subjectivity
 [280]Privacy-preserving anomaly detection (federated ML)Collaborative smart-grid substation operational logsFederated Unsupervised Cyberattack Detection (UCAD)UCAD model reliably detects attacks without centralizing raw data, preserving privacyRequires homogeneous data distribution across substations; performance degrades with noisy data inputs
 [281]Cyber-robust data-driven decision supportBig data from smart renewables (various, not specified)Data-driven Decision Tree (DT-DD) with securityDT-DD framework enhances environmental/operational security for renewables; detects data manipulation attacksConcrete dataset not openly specified; focus is primarily on environmental rather than real-time attack scenarios
 [282]Hybrid ensemble learning for SCADA cybersecurityUNSW-NB15, MSU water system intrusion datasetHybrid Ensemble Learning Model (HELM)HELM using network sensors boosts breach detection over single-model baselinesHeterogeneity between network sensor types can affect harmonization and detection accuracy
 [283]Explainable DL for attack detection (EV charging)CIC EV Charger Attack Dataset 2024 (CICEVSE2024)Custom Explainable Deep Learning ModelNovel DL model with explainability outperforms traditional methods on EV charging cyberattack scenariosOnly tested for EV chargers; explainability adds computational cost; limited dataset diversity
 [284]Attack patterns in blockchain comms for energyBlockchain-based comm-net dataset (Solana, open blockchains)Statistical pattern analysis, descriptive MLPresents labeled dataset for SQL Injection, Spoofing, MitM; highlights blockchain’s vulnerabilitiesData is open, but scenarios rely more on simulation than threats observed in field deployments
 [285]AI/ML for anomaly detection, testbeds in energyEmulated energy cyber–physical models and real testbedsML models (deep learning, XAI), anomaly detectorsCompares XAI approaches, underlines need for transparent AI; testbeds bridge lab-to-field knowledge gapTestbed realism, transfer of lab results to real-world utilities remains challenging; heavy computational demands
Table 17. Energy-routing strategies based on AI (limitations, applicability, and advantages).
Table 17. Energy-routing strategies based on AI (limitations, applicability, and advantages).
ReferencesLimitationsApplicabilityAdvantages
[322]Involves heavy computation, substantial data input, and meticulous hyperparameter optimization.Ideal for energy management in real-time within compact to moderately sized networks.Ensures stable power regulation for ERs and DGs across sub-grids, fitting for networks with dynamic behavior.
[323]Relies on large-scale data and exhibits significant computational load, which may hinder real-time functionality in dynamic environments.Ideal for real-time operations in controlled or limited-scale systems, but performance may degrade in complex, evolving environments.Achieves holistic optimization by disseminating local data, cutting down the amount of communication required between ERs.
[324]Based solely on the training dataset, with no emphasis on generalization, and involves tuning of hyperparametersStruggles in scalable systems, particularly when data is lacking and adaptability is crucialReal-time optimization of energy flow routes
Table 19. Comparison of optimization methods in energy systems.
Table 19. Comparison of optimization methods in energy systems.
MethodsApplicationsWeaknessesStrengths
AI Computing MethodAdaptive response to real-time network changes, with support for predictive maintenance and fault handling.Requires substantial computing resources and a high volume of training data.Strengthens real-time decision capabilities, enables autonomous responses to network changes, and increases scalability and robustness.
Metaheuristic OptimizationReliable/low-variability networksConsumes substantial processing energy, offers limited responsiveness in real-time scenarios, and has poor scalability in broad network deployments.Capable of identifying optimal routes and lowering energy losses, best applied in stable network scenarios.
MA ArchitectureEnergy networks based on decentralized architecture, featuring real-time routing and traffic management.As network size increases, agent coordination becomes more complicated, possibly leading to slower decision-making under heavy loads.Facilitates autonomous decisions across the network, reducing the need for centralized control. It is highly scalable and flexible, well-suited to address congestion and shifting topologies
Table 20. Number of normal and DDoS attack samples in each split of datasets, and total size of datasets [338].
Table 20. Number of normal and DDoS attack samples in each split of datasets, and total size of datasets [338].
MDDA DatasetTrain Test SplitsNormal TrafficDDoS TrafficTotal Samples
D1Training Set 193,14363,768156,911
Test Set 132,76934,47967,248
D2Training Set 2132,79224,119156,911
Test Set 238,56628,68267,248
D3Training Set 3128,34628,565156,911
Test Set 345,01822,23067,248
D4Training Set 4132,14324,771156,914
Test Set 459,973727767,250
Total Samples662,750233,891896,641
Table 21. Comparison of several models’ performance on the MDDA dataset [338].
Table 21. Comparison of several models’ performance on the MDDA dataset [338].
ModelAccuracyModelAccuracy
SAE0.76Bagging0.53
DAE0.29Boosting0.44
MDAE0.29Stacking0.75
ELMAE0.29RF0.57
CNN-BiLSTM0.73NB0.41
Claasic SVM0.34J480.52
QSVM0.61CNN-GRU0.71
DT0.59ARIMA-LWCNN0.69
RF0.52RF0.73
QDA0.34NB0.41
NB0.41SVM0.66
XGB0.56XGB0.55
Table 22. Future research directions in energy generation.
Table 22. Future research directions in energy generation.
Research AreaFuture Research FocusRelevant Studies
Resource AssessmentDevelop high-resolution, multi-source forecasting models and expand open-access datasets [1,2,3,4,5]
Technological EfficiencyCreate adaptive optimization algorithms and extend digital-twin frameworks to diverse renewable systems [6,7,8,9,10]
Climate ResilienceDesign climate-resilient infrastructure and modular hybrid systems [9,11,12,13]
Policy InnovationDevelop dynamic policy models and innovative public engagement strategies [14,17,18,19]
Grid and StorageOptimize HESS configurations and integrate predictive maintenance in charging algorithms [22,23,25,26]
Geopolitical and SocialQuantify geopolitical impacts and expand real-time sentiment analysis [28,29,30,31]
CybersecurityDevelop adversarially resilient and scalable detection systems [34,35,36,37,38,43,45,58]
Interdisciplinary ApproachesIntegrate resource, technological, climate, policy, and cybersecurity frameworks [1,11,14,34]
Table 23. Future research directions for smart-grid T&D systems.
Table 23. Future research directions for smart-grid T&D systems.
Research AreaProposed ApproachRelevant References
DER and Microgrid IntegrationDevelop scalable AI-driven optimization models for dynamic load and renewable energy integration [88,89,123]
Cybersecurity EnhancementsCombine hybrid AI models and privacy-preserving techniques for multi-vector attack detection [58,79,162,163]
Scalable AI ModelsImprove computational efficiency of CNNs, LSTMs, and GANs for large-scale T&D applications [82,83,138,141,152]
DC Distribution NetworksDesign hybrid AC-DC grids with AI-powered control interfaces [73,78]
AMI and Communication ResilienceDevelop adaptive encryption and blockchain-based protocols for secure data transmission [85,87,174,175]
Hybrid Model OptimizationIntegrate deep learning with real-time optimization for multi-objective T&D challenges [116,117,158,159]
Table 24. Future research directions for smart-grid energy utilization.
Table 24. Future research directions for smart-grid energy utilization.
Research AreaKey FocusPotential ApproachesRelevant Studies
Scalability and ValidationReal-world deployment and scalability of optimization modelsLarge-scale pilot studies, cross-regional validation, simplified computational models [228,231,232]
CybersecurityAdaptive, universal cybersecurity frameworksBlockchain-based security, federated learning, real-time intrusion detection [258,264,268,280]
AI and ML OptimizationEnergy-efficient, explainable AI modelsLightweight algorithms, federated learning, environmental impact assessments [250,253,255]
Renewable IntegrationImproved forecasting and integration of renewablesAdvanced weather forecasting, ML-based prediction models, hybrid renewable systems [222,226,227]
Energy Storage SystemsCost-effective, sustainable ESS technologiesNext-generation batteries, hybrid ESS integration, lifecycle analysis [233,236,241]
Demand-Side ManagementUser-centric DSM frameworksBehavioral economics, gamification, cross-regional DSM models [242,243,245]
Policy and EconomicsDynamic policy and economic frameworksCost-benefit analyses, regulatory impact studies, cross-regional policy models [209,210,245]
Table 25. Future research directions for energy-routing protocols.
Table 25. Future research directions for energy-routing protocols.
Research DirectionObjectivesPotential Approaches
Hybrid Protocol DevelopmentCombine strengths of AI, metaheuristics, and MAS for adaptive, scalable routingIntegrate DRL [322], FA [326], and MARL [336] for predictive, decentralized optimization
Scalability and Computational EfficiencyReduce computational overhead for large-scale EI networksUse edge computing, few-shot learning, and GPU-based parallel processing [309]
Security EnhancementsEnsure secure energy packet transmissionImplement blockchain [335] and lightweight cryptography for ERs
Dynamic Network AdaptationHandle topology changes and failures in real-timeCombine MAS with GNNs [313] and RL [336] for adaptive routing
Renewable Energy IntegrationOptimize routing for intermittent renewable sourcesExtend multi-objective PSO [330] and GA [328] to prioritize DERs
Congestion and Scheduling OptimizationMitigate delays and losses in high-demand scenariosDevelop AI-based TS algorithms [331] with MAS control [334]
Standardized FrameworkEnsure interoperability across EI implementationsStandardize EI Cards and Energy IP protocols [290]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ishfaq, H.; Kanwal, S.; Anwar, S.; Abdussalam, M.; Amin, W. Enhancing Smart Grid Security and Efficiency: AI, Energy Routing, and T&D Innovations (A Review). Energies 2025, 18, 4747. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18174747

AMA Style

Ishfaq H, Kanwal S, Anwar S, Abdussalam M, Amin W. Enhancing Smart Grid Security and Efficiency: AI, Energy Routing, and T&D Innovations (A Review). Energies. 2025; 18(17):4747. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18174747

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ishfaq, Hassam, Sania Kanwal, Sadeed Anwar, Mubarak Abdussalam, and Waqas Amin. 2025. "Enhancing Smart Grid Security and Efficiency: AI, Energy Routing, and T&D Innovations (A Review)" Energies 18, no. 17: 4747. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18174747

APA Style

Ishfaq, H., Kanwal, S., Anwar, S., Abdussalam, M., & Amin, W. (2025). Enhancing Smart Grid Security and Efficiency: AI, Energy Routing, and T&D Innovations (A Review). Energies, 18(17), 4747. https://doi.org/10.3390/en18174747

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop