Integration of Multi-Agent Systems and Artificial Intelligence in Self-Healing Subway Power Supply Systems: Advancements in Fault Diagnosis, Isolation, and Recovery
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- (1)
- Investigate the historical development and current state of self-healing technologies in power supply systems, with a particular focus on their adaptation and application in subway power systems.
- (2)
- Analyze how MASs and AI enhance the capabilities of subway systems in fault detection, isolation, and recovery, enabling autonomous decision-making and real-time responses to system failures.
- (3)
- Examine the integration of the IEC 61850 communication standard with MASs [2], and how this contributes to decentralized control, improving fault recovery and enhancing the scalability of self-healing systems in subway power networks.
- (4)
- Address the unique challenges faced by subway systems, such as reliability, response times, fault management, and system resilience, and propose integrated solutions through the application of MASs and AI.
- (1)
- Enhancing the Reliability and Efficiency of Power Supply Systems: The self-healing technology in subway power systems can significantly improve the system’s automatic diagnosis and fault recovery capabilities, thereby reducing service interruptions caused by system failures. By incorporating advanced monitoring technologies and automation tools, the self-healing system can respond rapidly to faults, minimizing reliance on manual intervention, and increasing the speed and accuracy of fault resolution.
- (2)
- Ensuring Safe and Smooth Urban Transit: As a major public transportation system, the safety of subway operations directly impacts the lives of thousands of passengers and the overall public safety of the city. Self-healing technology helps prevent accidents caused by power instability or interruptions by promptly detecting and addressing power supply issues, significantly improving the safety of subway operations.
- (3)
- Adapting to the Needs of Modern Urban Development: As urbanization accelerates, subway systems face increasing challenges, including rising passenger numbers, higher service expectations, and more complex operating environments. Self-healing technology, through intelligent management and real-time data analysis, optimizes the performance of subway power systems, better meeting these evolving demands.
- (4)
- Improving Passenger Experience: The application of self-healing technology goes beyond enhancing technical performance; it directly improves the passenger experience by reducing faults and delays. For example, the system can automatically isolate and repair minor faults without disrupting the entire network, providing passengers with more stable and reliable service.
- (5)
- Driving Technological Innovation and Industry Progress: Research into self-healing technology for subway power systems has spurred innovations in related technologies, including applications in artificial intelligence, the Internet of Things (IoT), and big data analytics. The integration and innovation of these technologies not only optimize subway power systems but also promote the development of intelligent transportation and smart city technologies.
- (1)
- Introduction to the Concept of Self-Healing: This paper begins by introducing the basic concept of self-healing, which originally stems from biological systems. It explains how this concept has been adapted for use in power systems. The primary function of self-healing technology in power systems is to reduce human intervention by automating the processes of fault detection, isolation, and recovery. This, in turn, enhances the reliability and efficiency of the overall system. In terms of historical background, this paper reviews the evolution of the self-healing concept within power systems. It highlights notable initiatives such as EPRI’s IntelliGrid project and the U.S. Department of Energy’s Modern Grid Initiative, both of which signify the integration of self-healing technologies as essential components of modern intelligent energy systems.
- (2)
- Self-Healing Control Architectures: The discussion then shifts to various control architectures employed in self-healing technology for distribution networks. This paper compares hierarchical control systems with MASs, illustrating the shift from centralized systems to more decentralized and faster-responding systems. This paper emphasizes that, although self-healing technologies have been extensively researched and developed in traditional power systems, they are relatively new in the context of subway power systems. It advocates for adapting self-healing technology to subway systems by leveraging the unique characteristics of these systems and incorporating both MASs and the IEC 61850 standard.
- (3)
- Fault Diagnosis and Recovery Technologies: This paper provides a comprehensive review of current technologies used for fault location, isolation, and recovery in distribution networks and railway systems. Special attention is given to the application of these technologies in subway systems, where both direct judgment methods and computational analysis approaches for fault location are explored. In terms of innovation, this paper discusses the potential of using AI for fault diagnosis and recovery. The integration of AI is seen as a promising way to significantly enhance the system’s ability to address complex, multi-point faults.
- (4)
- Development of New Technologies and Challenges: This paper forecasts the future application of hybrid augmented intelligence and generative AI in subway power systems. These emerging technologies are expected to be effective tools for solving complex fault scenarios. However, this paper also discusses the technical challenges posed by the introduction of flexible direct current (DC) technology into subway power systems. It examines how this development may introduce new challenges for implementing self-healing technologies in these systems.
- (1)
- Enhancing the Stability and Reliability of Subway Power Systems: The application of self-healing technologies can significantly reduce service interruptions and accidents caused by power issues in subway operations. This, in turn, improves the overall stability and reliability of the subway power system, which is crucial for meeting the growing demand for urban public transportation, ensuring the safety and efficiency of travel for millions of passengers.
- (2)
- Promoting the Development of Intelligent Transportation Systems: By integrating advanced information technologies and communication standards such as IEC 61850, self-healing technology in subway power systems not only improves the efficiency of fault management but also accelerates the development of intelligent transportation systems. These integrated technologies provide vital support for building smart cities.
- (3)
- Optimizing Energy Management and Environmental Sustainability: Self-healing technologies contribute to optimizing energy distribution and usage efficiency, helping reduce energy consumption and environmental impact. When applied globally, these technologies can positively influence energy conservation, emissions reduction, and environmental protection.
- (4)
- Inspiration and Advancement for Related Fields. (i) Cross-application of smart grid technologies: The self-healing technology in subway power systems draws from key aspects of smart grid technology, such as real-time data monitoring and automated fault response. This not only enhances the level of automation in subway systems but also provides new approaches and methodologies for applying smart grid technologies in other fields. (ii) Fostering multidisciplinary integration: This paper emphasizes the integration of MASs and artificial intelligence in self-healing systems for subway power supply. This multidisciplinary fusion promotes collaboration across fields such as computer science, electrical engineering, and transportation engineering, opening up new research and application areas. (iii) Inspiring new business models and policy development: The advancement of self-healing technologies in subway power systems may inspire new business models, such as performance-based service contracts and advanced maintenance services. It may also encourage governments and industries to establish relevant standards and policies to support the widespread deployment and application of such technologies.
2. Review of Self-Healing Technologies Within Electrical and Subway Power Systems
2.1. The Concept of Self-Healing in Metro Power Supply Systems
2.1.1. Relevance to Metro Power Supply Systems
2.1.2. Mathematical Representation of Self-Healing in Metro Power Supply
2.2. Historical Evolution of Self-Healing Strategies in Electrical Power Systems
2.2.1. Early Concepts and Precursor Technologies
2.2.2. The Emergence of Self-Healing Principles in the Late 20th Century
- (1)
- Organizational Level: At this highest level, the central control center formulates global power strategies, ensuring the continuous operation and safety of the system. It is responsible for strategic planning, long-term optimization, and high-level decision-making. The decisions made at this level influence the overall performance and resilience of the subway power network.
- (2)
- Coordination Level: The substation level corresponds to the coordination level, where individual regions or sub-networks are managed. This level coordinates the activities of various subsystems, ensuring that resources are effectively allocated, especially during fault conditions. Coordination includes dynamic load balancing, fault recovery task prioritization, and optimization of energy distribution across the network. The system is capable of rapid response during fault events, adjusting operational parameters to restore normal conditions as quickly as possible.
- (3)
- Execution Level: The execution level consists of intelligent devices and control units, such as circuit breakers, switches, and sensors. These devices perform specific actions, such as disconnecting faulty areas, restoring power from backup sources, and adjusting load distribution. The execution level’s effectiveness is critical for minimizing the impact of faults, as it directly influences the speed and precision of the fault recovery process.
2.2.3. Influence of the Smart Grid Paradigm
- (1)
- Wide-Area Monitoring, Protection, and Control (WAMPAC): PMUs measuring voltage and current phasors synchronized to a global positioning system (GPS) time reference provided near-instantaneous snapshots of system conditions [44]. Such granular visibility enabled early fault detection and advanced protection schemes that adapt to changing conditions [45].
- (2)
- Distributed Intelligent Control: The shift from monolithic control architectures to decentralized or distributed approaches, wherein local controllers or agents communicate and collaborate, accelerated. This setup was regarded as crucial for self-healing, as localized intelligence can isolate faults closer to their source and coordinate reconfiguration strategies quickly.
- (3)
- Predictive and Preventive Measures: Smart grids embraced a shift from reactive fault management to proactive asset management and system planning. Machine learning models and robust optimization techniques were developed to predict equipment failures, forecast load patterns, and identify vulnerabilities in the network topology.
2.2.4. Convergence with Multi-Agent Systems and Artificial Intelligence
2.2.5. Lessons Learned and Ongoing Challenges
- (1)
- Communication Infrastructure: Adequate, reliable, and secure data exchange is critical for successful self-healing. Historically, the absence of high-bandwidth, low-latency communication hampered early initiatives, underscoring the need for robust communication standards and architectures, such as IEC 61850, to ensure interoperability among devices and systems.
- (2)
- Coordination Complexity: The transition from centralized to distributed control paradigms introduces complexity in coordination among multiple agents. The necessity of robust algorithms for consensus, negotiation, and conflict resolution remains an important area of ongoing research.
- (3)
- Scalability: Early demonstration projects often took place on relatively small-scale feeders. Scaling up self-healing solutions to entire distribution networks or interlinked systems involving numerous microgrids requires careful architectural design that balances local autonomy with central oversight.
- (4)
- Cybersecurity Concerns: Increased digitalization raises the threat of cyberattacks, data tampering, and privacy breaches. Protecting self-healing frameworks from malicious interventions or denial-of-service attacks presents a nontrivial challenge that requires sophisticated security protocols and risk assessment methodologies.
- (5)
- Economic Viability: Self-healing systems can be capital-intensive to implement, especially in existing grids with aging infrastructure. The cost-effectiveness of retrofits, the complexity of new device installation, and the required training of operational staff are all factors influencing widespread adoption.
2.3. Key Components and Architecture of Self-Healing Mechanisms in Modern Power Networks
2.3.1. Hardware Foundation: Intelligent Electronic Devices, Sensors, and Switchgear
2.3.2. Communication Protocols and Standards
2.3.3. Control Hierarchies: Centralized, Decentralized, and Distributed Approaches
- (1)
- Primary Control (Local/Device Level): Protective relays and IEDs that execute overcurrent detection, undervoltage protection, or distance protection. They can isolate faults locally with minimal latency.
- (2)
- Secondary Control (Feeder or Zone Level): Substation-based controllers that coordinate reconfiguration among multiple feeders or zones. They receive aggregated data from local devices and can implement advanced reconfiguration strategies such as switching feeder ties or transferring loads.
- (3)
- Tertiary Control (Control Center Level): Higher-level supervision that oversees the entire utility network, optimizing long-term planning, load balancing, and restoration procedures when local measures are insufficient.
2.3.4. Core Functions of Self-Healing Mechanisms
- (1)
- Fault Detection and Classification: High-speed relays, coupled with modern sensor networks, identify abnormal conditions (e.g., short circuits, overcurrent, or voltage collapse) and classify the type and location of the fault. AI-based classifiers often enhance accuracy under noisy conditions or complex fault scenarios.
- (2)
- Fault Isolation: Once a fault is identified, circuit breakers, reclosers, or sectionalizers operate to isolate only the affected section. This isolation must be performed quickly to mitigate damage and maintain stability in the healthy portions of the system.
- (3)
- Service Restoration (Reconfiguration): The most distinctive feature of self-healing systems is their capacity to reroute power around the fault, restoring service to the greatest extent possible. Automated reconfiguration may involve closing tie switches or adjusting feeder topology. MASs can play a significant role in coordinating these reconfigurations autonomously.
- (4)
- System Optimization: Beyond restoring service, many self-healing frameworks incorporate optimization functions that ensure voltage profiles, line loading, and overall reliability are improved. Techniques such as dynamic voltage regulation, reactive power compensation, and automated load shedding contribute to system stability and performance.
- (5)
- Predictive and Preventive Maintenance: Self-healing extends beyond fault handling to proactively safeguard system health. Condition monitoring of critical assets (e.g., transformers and cables) and AI-driven anomaly detection can reduce the incidence of unexpected failures and optimize maintenance scheduling.
2.3.5. Role of Artificial Intelligence and Advanced Analytics
- (1)
- Fault Pattern Recognition: Neural networks and machine learning models can detect subtle fault precursors by analyzing waveform distortions, harmonic anomalies, or partial discharge data.
- (2)
- Real-Time Contingency Analysis: AI-driven simulators can run contingency analyses in parallel, evaluating various switching actions or load transfers under multiple fault scenarios.
- (3)
- Adaptive Protection: In networks with high penetration of distributed generation, fault levels and power flows can vary significantly. AI-based adaptive protection adjusts relay settings dynamically to accommodate changing conditions.
- (4)
- Asset Health Forecasting: Machine learning algorithms parse historical failure data, meteorological records, and real-time measurements to predict the residual life of components, supporting proactive replacement or refurbishment decisions.
2.3.6. Security and Reliability Considerations
- (1)
- Intrusion Detection Systems (IDSs): Deployed at the substation level to monitor suspicious network traffic or unauthorized system access.
- (2)
- Encryption and Authentication: Communication protocols incorporate cryptographic methods to protect data integrity and confidentiality.
- (3)
- Access Control Policies: Role-based access, multi-factor authentication, and stringent authorization policies limit the potential attack surface.
- (4)
- Redundant Pathways: Networks are often designed with diverse communication paths and backup control systems, preventing single points of failure from compromising the entire self-healing mechanism.
2.3.7. Outlook: Convergence with Distributed Energy Resources and Microgrids
2.4. Emerging Self-Healing Solutions in Subway Power Systems and Future Directions
2.4.1. Characteristics and Challenges of Subway Power Systems
- (1)
- Rapid Fluctuations in Load Demand: Train movements impose high-power draws within seconds, necessitating real-time monitoring of current and voltage profiles. Self-healing mechanisms must thus accommodate frequent load spikes without triggering false alarms.
- (2)
- Critical Safety Requirements: Failure in a subway power circuit can strand trains in tunnels or disrupt essential ventilation and signaling systems. Any self-healing strategy must prioritize passenger safety, ensuring that fault isolation or network reconfiguration does not inadvertently disconnect essential loads or violate safety protocols.
- (3)
- Limited Redundancy and Topological Constraints: While overhead distribution networks can add tie-lines or reconfigure feeders relatively easily, subway systems often have limited alternatives for routing power around a fault due to space constraints and rigid corridor layouts. This places heavier emphasis on pinpoint fault localization and targeted restoration strategies.
- (4)
- Integration with Signaling and Control Systems: Subway power infrastructure is closely interlinked with signaling, communications, and station facilities. Coordinating self-healing events with traction power protection, passenger information systems, and operational schedules can be complex, requiring robust communication and control architectures.
2.4.2. Adapting Self-Healing Functions for Subway Applications
- (1)
- Fault Detection and Localization: Traditional overcurrent or distance protection relays, combined with advanced sensor arrays, are complemented by traction-specific detection algorithms that account for the distinctive waveforms and power electronics used in subway systems. For instance, in systems equipped with regenerative braking, fault signals can overlap with normal operational signals. Intelligent algorithms, often grounded in AI-based pattern recognition, can distinguish these conditions more accurately than conventional threshold-based relays.
- (2)
- Isolation Strategies: Unlike overhead feeders, subway power rails or catenaries cannot always be sectionalized as flexibly. Self-healing solutions typically rely on specialized disconnect switches or breaker arrangements at traction substations. These devices must isolate the faulted segment while retaining power to adjacent segments, preventing a single fault event from cascading into large-scale service interruptions. The isolation strategy may also consider the dynamic location of trains, ensuring that no train is left in an unsafe or dark tunnel segment during the isolation process.
- (3)
- Rapid Service Restoration: Given the high passenger throughput in urban subway networks, restoring power promptly is a top operational priority. Some subway operators deploy ring or loop architectures, allowing the line to be fed from multiple substations. When a fault occurs, the system automatically opens circuit breakers to isolate the fault and closes alternate pathways so that power can still be supplied from another substation. Adaptive algorithms within a multi-agent framework can further refine the restoration sequence, minimizing inrush currents and voltage dips when re-energizing lines.
2.4.3. Leveraging IEC 61850 and Multi-Agent Systems in Subway Contexts
2.4.4. AI-Driven Fault Prediction and Maintenance
2.4.5. Case Studies and Pilots
- (1)
- Pilot A deployed a multi-agent system spanning multiple traction substations on a busy metropolitan rail line. Each substation agent automatically adjusted feeder connections when localized faults were detected. Early results showed a drastic reduction in fault clearance times and improved power quality during reconfiguration.
- (2)
- Pilot B focused on AI-based fault prediction for critical power components. By combining historical data on cable insulation failures with real-time temperature and partial discharge sensors, the pilot achieved a substantial decrease in unexpected cable faults, enhancing overall system availability.
- (3)
- Pilot C explored the integration of IEC 61850-based control architecture in a newly built subway extension. Standardized communication protocols allowed different vendors’ substations, protective relays, and SCADA systems to interoperate. The pilot demonstrated that advanced GOOSE messaging could achieve fault isolation within milliseconds, significantly reducing service interruptions.
2.4.6. Future Directions and Research Opportunities
- (1)
- Integration with Smart Mobility and Energy Management: As urban areas adopt more holistic “smart city” strategies, subway power systems may be integrated with other mobility solutions, such as electric buses or shared autonomous vehicles, forming an interconnected transportation energy ecosystem. Coordinated energy management across these systems could unlock novel self-healing and load balancing capabilities, for example by rerouting excess regeneratively braked energy to nearby electrical loads or EV charging stations.
- (2)
- Enhanced Sensor Deployment and Data Analytics: Future subways could leverage high-resolution sensors for continuous waveform monitoring, partial discharge analysis, and real-time location tracking of trains. With the advent of 5G and edge computing, massive data streams can be processed at the substation or trackside in near real time, facilitating ultra-fast fault detection and system reconfiguration. Research in advanced analytics, such as deep neural networks or reinforcement learning, promises to further refine these capabilities.
- (3)
- Holistic Resilience Frameworks: Beyond electrical faults, subway systems may face a variety of disruptions, from extreme weather events (e.g., flooding in tunnels) to cyberattacks targeting control systems. Expanding self-healing to encompass multi-hazard resilience would involve integrated monitoring of infrastructure conditions (e.g., water leakage and track integrity) and dynamic adaptation of protective or evacuation measures. This comprehensive approach would require new interdisciplinary collaborations among electrical engineers, civil engineers, cybersecurity experts, and urban planners.
- (4)
- Human-in-the-Loop vs. Full Autonomy: Although the end goal for many operators is to minimize human intervention, achieving full autonomy in critical infrastructure raises important questions regarding reliability, liability, and public acceptance. Ongoing research could investigate hybrid frameworks that allow human supervisors to override or guide self-healing decisions when system states deviate significantly from normal operating conditions. This “human-in-the-loop” paradigm can bolster operator trust while still leveraging the speed and efficiency of AI-driven automation.
- (5)
- Regulatory and Standardization Needs: Uniform guidelines for applying IEC 61850 or similar standards to traction power systems remain in their infancy. Multiple national and international standard-setting bodies may need to coordinate new protocols specific to subway environments. Moreover, regulators must evaluate safety and reliability metrics in the context of self-healing performance, ensuring that subway operators maintain rigorous compliance with established norms.
2.4.7. Synthesis and Outlook
3. Specific Challenges Faced by Subway Power Supply Systems
3.1. Complexity of Topology and Operational Constraints
3.1.1. Unique Structural Layout and Load Characteristics
3.1.2. Space Constraints and Infrastructure Limitations
3.1.3. Operational Demands and Safety Considerations
3.2. Fault Diagnosis, Isolation, and Recovery in Real-Time
3.2.1. High-Speed Fault Detection and Localization
3.2.2. Isolation Strategies in Constrained Environments
3.2.3. Rapid Service Restoration and Self-Healing Techniques
- (1)
- Prioritization of Essential Loads: Station lighting, ventilation fans, and communication systems typically take precedence.
- (2)
- Gradual Re-Energization: Inrush currents from multiple loads can lead to secondary faults if not controlled.
- (3)
- Adaptive Coordination: Agents update each other on the status of circuit breakers and load demands, recalculating the optimal restoration path dynamically.
3.3. Regulatory, Safety, and Integration Barriers with Emerging Technologies
3.3.1. Safety Standards and Compliance Requirements
3.3.2. Interoperability and Integration with Legacy Systems
- (1)
- Data Format Incompatibility: Legacy devices may not generate standardized digital outputs necessary for AI-based analysis.
- (2)
- Protocol Mismatch: Communication standards, such as IEC 61850, must be layered on top of older SCADA systems or even analog control signals.
- (3)
- Hardware Limitations: Legacy switchgear may lack the control interfaces to enable external agent-based decisions or real-time reconfiguration.
- (1)
- Data Format Incompatibility: Older devices may provide analog or proprietary digital signals, which necessitate specialized conversion or encapsulation.
- (2)
- Protocol Mismatch: Historic SCADA platforms or purely analog signaling can diverge significantly from contemporary standards like IEC 61850.
- (3)
- Hardware Limitations: Legacy switchgear often lacks the necessary interfaces for remote actuation or real-time reconfiguration, hindering direct MAS or AI control.
- (1)
- Protocol Gateways/Bridges: Gateways facilitate communication between legacy systems and modern platforms without requiring a wholesale replacement.
- (2)
- IEC 61850 Encapsulation: Wrapping legacy SCADA or analog signals in IEC 61850-compliant structures enables standardized management and interoperability.
- (3)
- Middleware for Data Format Conversion: Dedicated software tools unify disparate data formats, facilitating seamless integration into MAS or AI analytics.
- (1)
- Upgraded Control Interfaces: Introducing new control boards or modules into legacy switchgear equips these devices with real-time monitoring and remote operation capabilities.
- (2)
- Additional Real-Time Monitoring Modules: Enhancing measurement accuracy and granularity via sensors or digital metering units provides critical data for AI-driven decision-making.
- (3)
- Partial Preservation of Analog Devices: When a full replacement is not immediately feasible, integrating digital solutions alongside retained analog components ensures a gradual transition.
- (1)
- Prioritize Critical Nodes: Target the most failure-prone or operationally significant components for early-stage retrofitting.
- (2)
- Assess Feasible Investment and Downtime: Balance the need for system reliability with available funding and permissible service interruptions.
- (3)
- Define a Technological Evolution Path: Implement an overarching plan that anticipates future standards and protects long-term compatibility.
- (1)
- Incremental Equipment Replacement/Installation: Execute hardware upgrades and software integration in a series of controlled deployments to minimize risk.
- (2)
- Protocol and Data Interface Validation: Conduct rigorous testing of gateways, interfaces, and data conversion processes to ensure coherence and reliability.
- (3)
- MAS/AI-Integrated Testing: Validate the interaction between upgraded devices and AI-driven control systems, confirming that self-healing mechanisms function effectively under real-world conditions.
- (1)
- Technological Upgrades: Continuously refine the integrated system in response to emerging digital standards and novel AI algorithms.
- (2)
- Scheduled Device Renewal: Replace aging assets as part of routine maintenance, gradually increasing the proportion of modern, digitally enabled equipment.
- (3)
- Adoption of Emerging Standards: Align future developments with evolving industry protocols to maintain long-term interoperability and performance excellence.
3.3.3. Balancing Innovation, Cost, and Public Acceptability
3.4. Advancing Fault Management and Self-Healing Capabilities in Subway Power Supply Systems
- (1)
- Improved Detection Speed: MAS-based systems are capable of detecting faults in near real time, a critical feature for high-speed subway systems where rapid fault detection can minimize service disruptions and enhance passenger safety.
- (2)
- Increased Flexibility: Unlike traditional systems that follow fixed algorithms, MASs adapt to real-time network conditions, allowing for dynamic fault isolation and recovery strategies. This is especially important in complex subway topologies, where conventional systems struggle to handle intricate network configurations.
- (3)
- Enhanced Recovery Efficiency: MASs can reconfigure power distribution networks on the fly, ensuring that critical loads like lighting and ventilation are restored first, which is crucial for subway systems where passenger safety is paramount.
- (4)
- Space and Maintenance Benefits: Traditional systems require significant hardware installations, which can be difficult in the confined underground spaces of subway systems. MASs, by contrast, use distributed sensors and intelligent agents, reducing the need for additional hardware and simplifying system maintenance.
- (1)
- Integration with Legacy Systems: Integrating MASs with older subway power infrastructures presents significant challenges due to outdated communication protocols and hardware limitations. Future research should focus on developing seamless integration frameworks that allow for gradual modernization of legacy systems without major disruptions to existing operations.
- (2)
- Regulatory Challenges: The deployment of MAS-based systems in subway networks requires updates to regulatory frameworks, especially in terms of safety certifications and standards compliance. Ongoing collaboration between AI experts, regulatory bodies, and transit authorities will be essential to harmonize new technologies with existing safety protocols.
- (3)
- Cost and Implementation Feasibility: While MASs offer significant benefits, the initial cost of implementation may be prohibitive for many subway systems, especially those in less economically developed regions. Future research should focus on developing cost-effective solutions that make MAS adoption more accessible, including low-cost sensors and cloud-based processing frameworks.
- (4)
- Real-Time Data Processing: Edge computing and machine learning algorithms will play a critical role in processing the massive amounts of data generated by subway power supply systems [86,87,88,89,90]. Future advancements in these technologies will be crucial for achieving the real-time decision-making required for effective self-healing.
4. The Integration of MASs and the IEC 61850 Standard into Subway Power Systems
4.1. MAS-Based Approaches to Self-Healing in Subway Power Systems
4.1.1. Conceptual Foundations and Control Philosophies of MASs
- xi is the local state vector observed by agent i;
- x−i represents the states observed by neighboring agents or those shared through communication;
- Ji is the cost function capturing local objectives (e.g., minimize power loss, ensure safe operation under fault conditions, or maintain voltage within permissible limits);
- Ui is the feasible action space for agent i.
4.1.2. MAS-Based Fault Detection and Diagnosis
4.1.3. MAS-Based Fault Isolation and Restoration
4.1.4. Evaluation of MASs in Subway Environments
4.2. Implementation of the IEC 61850 Standard in Subway Power Systems
4.2.1. Foundations of IEC 61850 and Its Relevance to Subway Networks
- (1)
- Logical Nodes (LNs): Abstract representations of power system functions (e.g., measurement, protection, and control).
- (2)
- Data Objects and Data Attributes: Structured to capture various aspects of a function’s state, measurement readings, and control parameters.
- (3)
- Communication Services: Such as GOOSE for high-speed event transfer, and MMS (Manufacturing Message Specification) for client–server communications.
4.2.2. IEC 61850 Network Redundancy and Communication Protocols
- (1)
- Parallel Redundancy Protocol (PRP) sends duplicate packets over independent LANs, eliminating single points of failure.
- (2)
- High-availability Seamless Redundancy (HSR) adopts a ring topology, where each node forwards frames in both directions around the ring, ensuring zero recovery time in the case of link interruption.
- (3)
4.2.3. System Configuration Language (SCL) and Engineering
4.2.4. IEC 61850 Services for Self-Healing
- (1)
- GOOSE Messaging for Fast Trip Signals: Agents or protective relays can disseminate critical messages throughout the local substation or extended feeder within milliseconds, facilitating prompt fault isolation.
- (2)
- Reporting and Logging Services: These allow an MAS or central authority to monitor system states in near real-time, capturing event sequences needed for diagnosing deeper network issues.
- (3)
- MMS for Agent–IED Interactions: MAS architecture can rely on MMS-based client–server communications to read or write device parameters, retrieve trending data, or orchestrate switchgear commands at a slower but more comprehensive timescale.
4.2.5. Challenges and Limitations in Subway Contexts
4.3. Convergent MAS–IEC 61850 Architecture for Fault Diagnosis, Isolation, and Restoration
4.3.1. Architectural Overview and Design Considerations
- (1)
- Agent Layer: Comprising local device agents (e.g., relay agents and switchgear agents) and a station-level agent (or aggregator) that coordinates sectional restoration.
- (2)
- IEC 61850 Communication Layer: Facilitating high-speed GOOSE transmissions among local agents for real-time protective functions, and employing MMS for configuration, monitoring, and slower control commands.
- (3)
- Coordinated Control Layer: A higher-level mechanism, often at the control center, that merges data from multiple stations or lines. This layer might also integrate advanced AI algorithms for centralized oversight and strategic decisions.
4.3.2. Fault Diagnosis and Localization Workflow
- (1)
- Initial Detection (Local Agent): Upon sensing an abnormal current or voltage signature (modeled by LN PTOC or PDIS), the local agent increments an internal fault counter. If the magnitude exceeds a set threshold, the agent broadcasts a GOOSE-based “suspected fault” message to adjacent nodes.
- (2)
- Peer Confirmation (Neighboring Agents): Neighboring agents also evaluate their local signals. If they detect correlated anomalies, they respond with a GOOSE “confirmation” message. Weighted voting can be employed to mitigate false positives.
- (3)
- Station-Level Aggregation: The station-level or aggregator agent (connected via MMS and local GOOSE) collects these events. Using a pre-defined topology map (SCL-based), it identifies the line segment or bus location with the highest probability of fault development.
- (4)
- Refined Diagnostics: Optionally, advanced AI modules or traveling-wave-based algorithms can run at the aggregator level to further pinpoint the fault location.
- (5)
- Isolation Instruction: Once the aggregator agent validates the fault location, it issues GOOSE open commands to the relevant breakers or switches, ensuring minimal disruption to unaffected lines.
4.3.3. Restoration and Reconfiguration Strategies
4.3.4. Security and Redundancy Considerations
- (1)
- Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) [110]: Agents only process control instructions from authenticated roles recognized by the substation system.
- (2)
- Encrypted Tunneling of GOOSE/MMS: Emerging solutions propose TLS-based encryption for MMS, though GOOSE typically remains unencrypted for performance reasons.
- (3)
- Backup Communication Channels [111]: For critical commands, multiple GOOSE subscriptions may be created in parallel networks (e.g., PRP + HSR) to reduce the risk of packet loss or delay.
4.3.5. Practical Challenges and Future Outlook
5. Practical Applications of Self-Healing Techniques in Subway Systems
- (1)
- Substation-level self-healing applications in subway power systems;
- (2)
- Line-level self-healing mechanisms and network reconfiguration;
- (3)
- Cross-layer fault recovery techniques and strategies;
- (4)
- AI-driven fault diagnosis and recovery in complex scenarios.
5.1. Substation-Level Self-Healing Applications in Subway Power Systems
5.1.1. Fault Detection and Isolation
5.1.2. Automated Reconfiguration
5.1.3. Key Technologies for Substation-Level Self-Healing
5.2. Line-Level Self-Healing Mechanisms and Network Reconfiguration
5.2.1. Ring Network Configuration
5.2.2. Automated Switches and MASs for Fault Detection and Isolation
5.2.3. Reconfiguration and Rerouting Power
5.3. Cross-Layer Fault Recovery Techniques and Strategies
5.3.1. Hierarchical Recovery Systems
5.3.2. Coordinated Fault Isolation Across Layers
5.3.3. MASs for Multi-Layer Coordination
5.4. AI-Driven Fault Diagnosis and Recovery in Complex Scenarios
5.4.1. Machine Learning for Fault Prediction
5.4.2. Deep Learning for Real-Time Fault Diagnosis
5.4.3. AI for Automated Reconfiguration
6. Implications of AI Technologies for Future Subway Power Systems
6.1. AI-Enhanced Fault Diagnosis and Prognostics
6.1.1. Transition from Reactive to Predictive Maintenance
- (1)
- Machine Learning Models: Supervised learning algorithms (e.g., Support Vector Machines and Random Forests) can detect anomalies in high-dimensional data, building predictive models that correlate subtle parameter shifts—such as partial discharges or fluctuating voltage profiles—to impending failures.
- (2)
- Deep Learning Architectures: Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) and Recurrent Neural Networks (RNNs) offer enhanced feature extraction and sequence analysis, making it possible to detect complex non-linear relationships in sensor streams, identify irregularities in real time, and precisely localize potential faults within specific subsystems.
6.1.2. Real-Time Monitoring and Edge Analytics
6.1.3. Challenges and Future Directions
- (1)
- Data Fusion: Combining structured data (e.g., SCADA logs) with unstructured data (e.g., images and audio signals) for more holistic fault models.
- (2)
- Transfer Learning: Leveraging knowledge from related domains (e.g., electrified railways) to build robust classifiers even when local fault data are scarce.
- (3)
6.2. Reinforcement Learning and Decision-Making in Self-Healing Processes
6.2.1. Core Principles of Reinforcement Learning
- (1)
- Agent: The AI controller (or controllers) responsible for adjusting switch positions, redirecting power flows, or prioritizing fault isolation.
- (2)
- Environment: The subway power system, inclusive of its multi-bus topology, traction substations, feeders, and protective devices.
- (3)
- State: The real-time status of the system, including voltage levels, load demands, equipment health indicators, and fault locations.
- (4)
- Action: Any operational command the RL agent can perform, such as opening or closing circuit breakers, adjusting converter setpoints, or initiating fault isolation protocols.
- (5)
- Reward: A numerical signal representing the quality of each action, often linked to performance metrics like minimized outage duration, voltage stability, or reduced energy losses.
6.2.2. Adaptive Self-Healing Under Uncertainty
- (1)
- (2)
- Policy Gradient Methods: Algorithms like Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO) or Advantage Actor-Critic (A2C) learn continuous control policies, facilitating more nuanced actions such as incremental power flow adjustments.
- (3)
- Model-Based RL: By integrating predictive models of system behavior (e.g., partial differential equations describing network flows), RL agents can plan ahead, simulating potential outcomes of different actions before implementation.
6.2.3. Multi-Agent Coordination
6.2.4. Challenges in RL-Based Self-Healing
- (1)
- Safety Constraints: Subways operate under strict safety regulations, so RL actions must never compromise passenger safety. Techniques like safe RL or reward shaping can incorporate safety margins.
- (2)
- Scalability: Large systems with dozens of substations and thousands of sensors result in vast state-action spaces, necessitating advanced function approximation and distributed training architectures.
- (3)
- Learning Speed: RL algorithms may require numerous interactions or simulated “episodes” to learn effective policies. Building high-fidelity digital twins for training is thus essential.
- (4)
- Generalization: Policies learned under certain load patterns or fault conditions may not generalize well to unseen scenarios, underscoring the need for robust domain adaptation and online learning strategies.
6.3. Integration of AI and Multi-Agent Systems Under IEC 61850
6.3.1. Roles of MASs and IEC 61850 in Subway Power Systems
6.3.2. AI-Driven Coordination and Decision-Making
6.3.3. Interoperability and Standardization Benefits
6.3.4. Potential Obstacles and Evolution
- (1)
- Communication Latency: While IEC 61850 supports high-speed messaging, real-time AI inference may still demand edge computing infrastructure to avoid round-trip delays.
- (2)
- Cybersecurity: The standard’s emphasis on connectivity raises cybersecurity concerns. AI modules and MAS agents could become targets of sophisticated cyberattacks, necessitating robust encryption, authentication, and intrusion detection schemes.
- (3)
- Complexity of Agent Interactions: As the number of agents grows, orchestrating their interactions can become unwieldy. AI-based supervision layers must handle negotiation protocols, conflict resolution, and consistency checks.
- (4)
- Operational Validation: Formal verification and testing of AI-driven MAS solutions remain challenging, given the high-stakes nature of subway operations.
6.4. Cybersecurity, Privacy, and Data Management for AI-Driven Subway Power Systems
6.4.1. Cyber Threat Landscape
- (1)
- Data Poisoning: Manipulating training datasets to degrade AI model performance or trigger erroneous system decisions.
- (2)
- Ransomware: Encrypting critical operational data and demanding payment to restore access, thus threatening system continuity.
- (3)
- Denial of Service (DoS): Flooding communication channels with spurious traffic, hindering real-time control signals.
- (4)
- Sensor Spoofing: Feeding corrupted sensor data into AI models, leading to incorrect fault diagnoses or false alarms.
6.4.2. Data Privacy and Ethics
6.4.3. Comprehensive Data Governance
- (1)
- Data Ownership: Defining clear ownership structures for sensor data, operational logs, and passenger metrics, potentially involving multiple stakeholders (public transport authorities, private operators, and technology vendors).
- (2)
- Data Lifecycle Management: Establishing guidelines for data collection, storage, access, retention, and deletion. Ensuring that data archiving practices meet both regulatory requirements and system operational needs.
- (3)
- Metadata and Standardization: Maintaining standardized metadata to enhance data discoverability and interoperability, vital for multi-agent systems reliant on consistent data schemas.
- (4)
- Quality Assurance: Integrating data validation protocols and anomaly detection to safeguard against corrupted or incomplete data inputs that could compromise AI-driven decisions.
6.4.4. Strategies for Resilience and Compliance
- (1)
- Secure AI Pipelines: Implementing code-signing, containerization, and version control to prevent tampering with ML models or inference services.
- (2)
- Federated Learning: Training AI models locally on devices or substations and then aggregating only model parameters. This approach minimizes data movement and reduces exposure risks.
- (3)
- Incident Response and Recovery: Developing well-rehearsed contingency plans that detail how to isolate compromised systems, restore operational data, and communicate effectively with stakeholders.
- (4)
- Certification and Audits: Conducting regular third-party audits and penetration testing to validate the integrity of software components and to ensure ongoing compliance with evolving regulatory standards.
6.5. Next-Generation Operational Strategies and Socio-Economic Implications
6.5.1. Evolving Role of the Workforce
- (1)
- As AI-driven analytics and semi-autonomous systems take on routine tasks—such as fault detection or reconfiguration—human roles are likely to shift toward oversight, strategic decision-making, and specialized technical functions.
- (2)
- Upskilling and Reskilling: Engineers and technicians will need new skill sets, bridging power engineering with data science, cybersecurity, and AI model interpretation.
- (3)
- Collaborative Decision-Making: Operators will collaborate more closely with AI recommendations, requiring training in human–machine interfaces and explainable AI solutions to bolster trust and accountability.
- (4)
- New Roles: AI ethicists, data stewards, and cybersecurity specialists will emerge as essential staff for managing the complex socio-technical ecosystem.
6.5.2. Financial and Economic Dimensions
6.5.3. Urban Planning and Sustainable Development
6.5.4. Policy and Regulatory Considerations
- (1)
- Standardization: Expanding IEC 61850 or similar standards to cover next-generation AI requirements (e.g., real-time data streaming and advanced analytics models).
- (2)
- Safety and Liability: Clarifying who is responsible when AI-driven systems make decisions that lead to incidents—particularly if they deviate from conventional operator guidelines.
- (3)
- Incentive Structures: Providing tax breaks, grants, or other incentives for subway operators investing in advanced AI technologies, especially if these innovations yield public benefits such as reduced CO₂ emissions or improved accessibility.
6.6. Potential Security Flaws in AI-Driven Subway Power Systems and Mitigation Strategies
6.6.1. Key Security Threats in AI-Driven Subway Power Systems
6.6.2. Mitigation Strategies for Enhancing Security
6.6.3. Summary of the Key Security Threats in AI-Driven Subway Power Systems
7. Conclusions and Policy Implications
7.1. Conclusions
7.2. Policy Implications
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
Abbreviation | Full Form |
AI | Artificial Intelligence |
AC/DC | Alternating Current/Direct Current |
CI | Condition-based Inspection |
DA/DO | Data Attribute/Data Object |
DC | Direct Current |
DER | Distributed Energy Resources |
DO | Data Object |
DOS | Denial of Service |
EMS | Energy Management System |
FLISR | Fault Location, Isolation, and Service Restoration |
GOOSE | Generic Object-Oriented Substation Event |
IED | Intelligent Electronic Device |
IEC 61850 | International Electrotechnical Commission 61850 Standard |
IDS | Intrusion Detection System |
IOT | Internet of Things |
LN | Logical Node |
MAS | Multi-Agent System |
MMS | Manufacturing Message Specification |
MMXU | Measurement Unit |
MTTR | Mean Time to Repair |
PDIS | Protection Distance Intelligent System |
PMU | Phasor Measurement Unit |
PRP | Parallel Redundancy Protocol |
PTOC | Protection Overcurrent Unit |
RSTP | Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol |
SAIDI | System Average Interruption Duration Index |
SAIFI | System Average Interruption Frequency Index |
SCADA | Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition |
SCL | System Configuration Language |
VAR | Voltage Amperes Reactive |
WAMPAC | Wide-Area Monitoring, Protection, and Control |
XML | eXtensible Markup Language |
References
- China Association of Metros. Annual Report on Statistics and Analysis of Urban Rail Transit 2023. Available online: https://www.camet.org.cn/xytj/tjxx/14894.shtml (accessed on 29 March 2024).
- IEC 61850; Communication Networks and Systems in Substations. International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC): Geneva, Switzerland, 2011.
- Shang, W.L.; Lv, Z. Low carbon technology for carbon neutrality in sustainable cities: A survey. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2023, 92, 104489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, L. Study on the Fault Diagnosis and Protection of Energy-Fed Supply System in Urban Mass Transit. Ph.D. Thesis, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing, China, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Du, F. Modeling for Metro Locomotive and Analysis of Fault Condition of DC Traction Power Supply System. Ph.D. Thesis, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing, China, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Zeng, B.; Zhang, J.; Yang, X.; Wang, J.; Dong, J.; Zhang, Y. Integrated planning for transition to low-carbon distribution system with renewable energy generation and demand response. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2013, 29, 1153–1165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allegretti, G.; Montoya, M.A.; Bertussi, L.A.S.; Talamini, E. When being renewable may not be enough: Typologies of trends in energy and carbon footprint towards sustainable development. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 168, 112860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, X. Research on Fault Location Methods for City DC Railway Traction System; Beijing Jiaotong University: Beijing, China, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Qin, B.; Wang, H.; Wang, Z.; Xiong, Z.; Zhao, J.; Lu, H.; Wang, M. Integrated development of urban rail transit and energy systems supported by underground space. Strateg. Study CAE 2023, 25, 45–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Serdar, M.Z.; Koç, M.; Al-Ghamdi, S.G. Urban transportation networks resilience: Indicators, disturbances, and assessment methods. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2022, 76, 103452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, K.K.; Lv, Y. Fault Location Method of Metro DC Traction Power Supply System Catenary. Urban Mass Transit 2022, 7, 222–224, 229. [Google Scholar]
- Wei, R.; Shi, G.; Zhuang, K.; Xia, J. Research on Fault Location of Subway DC Traction Power Supply System Based on GPS Time Synchronization. Mar. Electr. Electron. Eng. 2023, 43, 85–88. [Google Scholar]
- Jin, X.; Li, Z.; Hu, Z. Simulation of Fault Location for Subway DC Power Supply System Based on Time Domain Differential. Mar. Electr. Electron. Eng. 2017, 37, 67–70. [Google Scholar]
- Pei, W. Research on the Reliability of Subway Traction Power Supply Systems; Nanjing University of Science and Technology: Nanjing, China, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Zhou, J. Research on Online Reliability Evaluation for Traction Power Supply System of Metro Network; Shanghai Jiaotong University: Shanghai, China, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Sheng, S.; Li, K.K.; Chan, W.L.; Xiangjun, Z.; Xianzhong, D. Agent-based self-healing protection system. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2006, 21, 610–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ji, X.; Jian, L.; Yan, X.; Wang, H. Research on self-healing technology of smart distribution network based on multi-agent system. In Proceedings of the 2016 Chinese Control and Decision Conference (CCDC), Yinchuan, China, 28–30 May 2016; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2016; pp. 6132–6137. [Google Scholar]
- Xiang, G.; Xin, A. The application of self-healing technology in smart grid. In Proceedings of the 2011 Asia-Pacific Power and Energy Engineering Conference, Wuhan, China, 25–28 March 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, R.; Bie, Z. Distributed cluster-level cooperative control of dynamic virtual microgrid cluster for active distribution network. Autom. Electr. Power Syst. 2022, 46, 55–62. [Google Scholar]
- Zhao, Y.; Rieger, C.; Zhu, Q. Multi-agent learning for resilient distributed control systems. arXiv 2022, arXiv:2208.05060. [Google Scholar]
- Pang, Y.; Lodewijks, G. Agent-based intelligent monitoring in large-scale continuous material transport. In Proceedings of the 2012 9th IEEE International Conference on Networking, Sensing and Control, Beijing, China, 11–14 April 2012; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2012; pp. 79–84. [Google Scholar]
- Mayorov, G.; Stennikov, V.; Barakhtenko, E. Application of the multiagent approach to the research of integrated energy supply systems. In E3S Web of Conferences 2019; EDP Sciences: Les Ulis, France, 2019; Volume 114, p. 01006. [Google Scholar]
- Sujil, A.; Verma, J.; Kumar, R. Multi agent system: Concepts, platforms and applications in power systems. Artif. Intell. Rev. 2018, 49, 153–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, H.; Wang, Y.; Chen, Z. A novel renewable microgrid-enabled metro traction power system—Concepts, framework, and operation strategy. IEEE Trans. Transp. Electrif. 2021, 7, 1733–1749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saray, M.; Saray, M.; Kazan, C.; Guner, S. Optimization of renewable energy usage in public transportation: Mathematical model for energy management of plug-in PV-based electric metrobuses. J. Energy Storage 2024, 78, 109946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kilic, B.; Dursun, E. Integration of innovative photovoltaic technology to the railway trains: A case study for Istanbul airport-M1 light metro line. In Proceedings of the IEEE EUROCON 2017-17th International Conference on Smart Technologies, Ohrid, Macedonia, 6–8 July 2017; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2017; pp. 336–340. [Google Scholar]
- Kumar, G.M.S.; Cao, S. Leveraging energy flexibilities for enhancing the cost-effectiveness and grid-responsiveness of net-zero-energy metro railway and station systems. Appl. Energy 2023, 333, 120632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, J.; Wang, J.; Tong, F. Research and analysis of power supply load forecasting and self-healing control in urban rail transit system. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science 2021; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2021; Volume 769, p. 042093. [Google Scholar]
- Zheng, S.; Liu, Y.; Lin, Y.; Wang, Q.; Yang, H.; Chen, B. Bridging strategy for the disruption of metro considering the reliability of transportation system: Metro and conventional bus network. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2022, 225, 108585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalyvas, M.; McCracken, A. Doha Metro Novel Building Automation and Control System (BACS). J. Ind. Integr. Manag. 2024, 9, 571–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Longo, M.; Bramani, M. The automation control systems for the efficiency of metro transit lines. In Proceedings of the 2015 AEIT International Annual Conference (AEIT), Naples, Italy, 14–16 October 2015; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2015; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- National Energy Technology Laboratory. The Modern Grid Initiative; US: Department of Energy: Washington, DC, USA, 2008; pp. 26–30. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, C.; Jung, J.; Heydt, G.T.; Vittal, V.; Phadke, A. The Strategic Power Infrastructure Defense (SPID) System: A Conceptual Design. IEEE Control Syst. Mag. 2000, 20, 40–52. [Google Scholar]
- Li, T. Research on the Self-Healing Functions of Smart Distribution Grid and Its Benefits Evaluation Model; North China Electric Power University: Beijing, China, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Amin, M. Toward self-healing energy infrastructure systems. IEEE Comput. Appl. Power 2001, 14, 20–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shittu, E.; Tibrewala, A.; Kalla, S.; Wang, X. Meta-analysis of the strategies for self-healing and resilience in power systems. Adv. Appl. Energy 2021, 4, 100036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arefifar, S.A.; Alam, M.S.; Hamadi, A. A review on self-healing in modern power distribution systems. J. Mod. Power Syst. Clean Energy 2023, 11, 1719–1733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Madani, V.; Novosel, D.; Horowitz, S.; Adamiak, M.; Amantegui, J.; Karlsson, D.; Imai, S.; Apostolov, A. IEEE PSRC report on global industry experiences with system integrity protection schemes (SIPS). IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2010, 25, 2143–2155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maqsood, M.; Masood, A. Integration of Wireless HART and STK600 Development Kit for Data Collection in Wireless Sensor Networks. Master’s Thesis, Universitetet i Agder/University of Agder, Kristiansand, Norway, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Morais, B.T.P. Emerging Technologies and Future Trends in Substation Automation Systems for the Protection, Monitoring and Control of Electrical Substations; PQDT-Global: Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Majhi, A.A.K.; Mohanty, S. A comprehensive review on Internet of Things applications in power systems. IEEE Internet Things J. 2024, 11, 34896–34923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, L.; Bo, Z.; Wang, Q.P.; Liu, R.T.; Fan, W. Design of integrated wide area protection and control for power grid. DPI Proc. 2018, 1, 206–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hellman, C.; Aronson, M.; Tom, N.; Quan, W. The microprocessor and the minicomputer for earth terminal and network control. ITC Proc. 1981, 1, 529–548. [Google Scholar]
- Terzija, V.; Valverde, G.; Cai, D.; Regulski, P.; Madani, V.; Fitch, J.; Skok, S.; Begovic, M.M.; Phadke, A. Wide-area monitoring, protection, and control of future electric power networks. Proc. IEEE 2010, 99, 80–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahman, W.U.; Ali, M.; Mehmood, C.A.; Khan, A. Design and implementation for wide area power system monitoring and protection using phasor measuring units. WSEAS Trans. Power Syst. 2013, 8, 57–64. [Google Scholar]
- Cheng, L.F.; Yu, T. A new generation of AI: A review and perspective on machine learning technologies applied to smart energy and electric power systems. Int. J. Energy Res. 2019, 43, 1928–1973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, L.F.; Wei, X.; Li, M.; Tan, C.; Yin, M.; Shen, T.; Zou, T. Integrating evolutionary game-theoretical methods and deep reinforcement learning for adaptive strategy optimization in user-side electricity markets: A comprehensive review. Mathematics 2024, 12, 3241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, L.F.; Yu, T.; Zhang, X.S.; Yang, B. Parallel cyber-physical-social systems based smart energy robotic dispatcher and knowledge automation: Concepts, architectures and challenges. IEEE Intell. Syst. 2019, 34, 54–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nyangon, J. Climate-proofing critical energy infrastructure: Smart grids, artificial intelligence, and machine learning for power system resilience against extreme weather events. J. Infrastruct. Syst. 2024, 30, 03124001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- 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]
- Dick, K.; Russell, L.; Souley Dosso, Y.; Kwamena, F.; Green, J.R. Deep learning for critical infrastructure resilience. J. Infrastruct. Syst. 2019, 25, 05019003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nama, P.; Reddy, P.; Pattanayak, S.K. Artificial Intelligence for Self-Healing Automation Testing Frameworks: Real-Time Fault Prediction and Recovery. Artif. Intell. 2024, 64 (Suppl. S3), 111–141. [Google Scholar]
- Plevris, V.; Papazafeiropoulos, G. AI in Structural Health Monitoring for Infrastructure Maintenance and Safety. Infrastructures 2024, 9, 225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manoharan, A.; Sarker, M. Revolutionizing Cybersecurity: Unleashing the Power of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning for Next-Generation Threat Detection. Int. Res. J. Mod. Eng. Technol. Sci. 2022, 4, 2151–2164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fadi, O.; Karim, Z.; Mohammed, B. A survey on blockchain and artificial intelligence technologies for enhancing security and privacy in smart environments. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 93168–93186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tooki, O.O.; Popoola, O.M. A critical review on intelligent-based techniques for detection and mitigation of cyberthreats and cascaded failures in cyber-physical power systems. Renew. Energy Focus 2024, 51, 100628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmad, S. Real-Time Control and Power Management for Interconnected Microgrids with Self-Healing Capability. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2022. [Google Scholar]
- Rath, S.; Nguyen, L.D.; Sahoo, S.; Popovski, P. Self-healing secure blockchain framework in microgrids. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2023, 14, 4729–4740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Watuwa, B. Power Reliability Analysis of DC Traction Power Supply System: A Case Study of Addis Ababa Light Rail Transit; Addis Ababa University: Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2019; Available online: https://scholar.googleusercontent.com/scholar?q=cache:Q3mqEIVgZ1kJ:scholar.google.com/&hl=zh-CN&as_sdt=0,5&scioq=Power+Reliability+Analysis+of+DC+Traction+Power+Supply+System:+A+Case+Study+of+Addis+Ababa+Light+Rail+Transit (accessed on 10 March 2025).
- Ogunsola, A.; Mariscotti, A. Electromagnetic Compatibility in Railways: Analysis and Management; Springer Science & Business Media, Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated, 1 July 2013; pp. 1–528. Available online: https://books.google.com/books?hl=zh-CN&lr=&id=N5B3S13cPpIC&oi=fnd&pg=PR2&dq=related:YcJun2vRVgIJ:scholar.google.com/&ots=EecduOIHre&sig=teucUbqoCLzfPK-9XlVwRKHvlp4#v=onepage&q&f=false (accessed on 10 March 2025). [CrossRef]
- López, D.Á.J.L. Optimising the Electrical Infrastructure of Mass Transit Systems to Improve the Use of Regenerative Braking. Ph.D. Thesis, Universidad Pontificia Comillas, Madrid, Spain, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Parizad, A.; Baghaee, H.R. Overview of smart cyber-physical power systems: Fundamentals, Challenges, and Solutions. Wiley Online Libr. 2025, 1, 157–178. Available online: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781394191529.ch1 (accessed on 10 March 2025).
- Castro Gómez, A. Feasibility for the Introduction of Current Limiting Impedance for a Previously Solid Grounded Medium Voltage Distribution Network. Master’s Thesis, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy, 28 April 2017. Available online: https://www.politesi.polimi.it/retrieve/a81cb05c-3dc7-616b-e053-1605fe0a889a/Thesis%20Alex%20Castro.pdf (accessed on 10 March 2025).
- Haque, A.; Malik, A.; Shah, N.; Malik, J.A.; Ahmad, R.; Arif, M. Fundamentals of power electronics in smart cities. Taylor Fr. 2024, 1, 77–89. Available online: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.1201/9781032669809-1/fundamentals-power-electronics-smart-cities-ahteshamul-haque-naila-shah-junaid-ahmad-malik-azra-malik (accessed on 10 March 2025).
- Iovanovici, A. Designing Low Latency, Fault-Tolerant Sensor Networks Using Complex Networks Analysis. Timişoara: Editura Politehnica. 2015. ISBN 9786065549623, 6065549622. Available online: https://search.worldcat.org/zh-cn/title/1288695767 (accessed on 10 March 2025).
- Raghunath, K.; Rengarajan, N. Response time optimization with enhanced fault-tolerant wireless sensor network design for on-board rapid transit applications. Clust. Comput. 2019, 22 (Suppl. 4), 9737–9753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumari, S.; Tyagi, A.K. Wireless sensor networks: An introduction. Digit. Twin Blockchain Smart Cities 2024, 1, 12–22. Available online: https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=RIgaVmUAAAAJ&hl=en&num=20&oi=sra (accessed on 10 March 2025).
- Hernandez, J.C.; Sutil, F.S.; Vidal, P.G. Protection of a multiterminal DC compact node feeding electric vehicles on electric railway systems, secondary distribution networks, and PV systems. Turk. J. Electr. Eng. Comput. Sci. 2016, 24, 3123–3143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Swain, A.; Abdellatif, E.; Mousa, A.; Pong, P.W. Sensor technologies for transmission and distribution systems: A review of the latest developments. Energies 2022, 15, 7339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Georgilakis, P.S.; Hatziargyriou, N.D. Optimal distributed generation placement in power distribution networks: Models, methods, and future research. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2013, 28, 3420–3428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muzzammel, R.; Raza, A.; Hussain, M.R.; Abbas, G. MT-HVdc systems fault classification and location methods based on traveling and non-traveling waves—A comprehensive review. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 4760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamidi, R.J.; Livani, H. A recursive method for traveling-wave arrival-time detection in power systems. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2018, 33, 1097–1106. [Google Scholar]
- Costa, F.B.; Miranda, V.; Leite, H. Wavelet-based analysis and detection of traveling waves due to DC faults in LCC HVDC systems. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2019, 105, 158–165. [Google Scholar]
- Esmail, E.M.; Elsadd, M.A.; Elkalashy, N.I. A review: Smart distribution grid management using agents. WSEAS Trans. Power Syst. 2020, 1, 348234782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, C.; Chen, Z.; Bak, C.L. Multi-agent system based adaptive protection for dispersed generation integrated distribution systems. Trans. Power Syst. 2013, 1, 270506087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahman, M.S.; Muyeen, S.M.; Ghosh, A.; Islam, S.M. Multi-agent systems in ICT enabled smart grid: A status update on technology framework and applications. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2019, 1, 8765552. [Google Scholar]
- Alstom. Towards the First Railway Cybersecurity International Standard: Why Standards Are Important to Secure Railways; Alstom: Saint-Ouen-sur-Seine, France, 2024; Available online: https://www.alstom.com/press-releases-news/2024/3/towards-first-railway-cybersecurity-international-standard-why-standards-are-important-secure-railways (accessed on 10 March 2025).
- Radiflow. Securing Railway Operations from OT Cyberattacks; Radiflow: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2024; Available online: https://www.radiflow.com/white-papers/securing-railway-operations-from-ot-cyberattacks/ (accessed on 11 March 2025).
- REPLIL. Cybersecurity in Railway Digital Transformation Journey; REPLIL: Dubai, United Arab Emirates, 2024; Available online: https://www.replil.com/cybersecurity-in-railway-digital-transformation-journey/ (accessed on 11 March 2025).
- Mbango, F. Investigation into Alternative Protection Solutions for Distribution Networks. Ph.D. Thesis, Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Bellville, TX, USA, 2009. Available online: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/148365012.pdf (accessed on 11 March 2025).
- Dutta Pramanik, P.; Upadhyaya, B.; Kushwaha, A.; Bhowmik, D. Harnessing IoT: Transforming Smart Grid Advancements. In IoT for Smart Grid: Revolutionizing Electrical Engineering 2025, Chapter 7, 127–174; Wiley Online Library: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2025; Available online: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781394279401.ch7 (accessed on 11 March 2025).
- Pandiyan, P.; Saravanan, S.; Kannadasan, R.; Krishnaveni, S.; Alsharif, M.; Kim, M. A comprehensive review of advancements in green IoT for smart grids: Paving the path to sustainability. Energy Rep. 2024, 11, 5504–5531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baroud, S.Y.; Yahaya, N.A.; Elzamly, A.M. Cutting-Edge AI Approaches with MAS for PdM in Industry 4.0: Challenges and Future Directions. J. Appl. Data Sci. 2024, 5, 455–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chouhan, S.; Mohammadi, F.D.; Feliachi, A.; Solanki, J.M.; Choudhry, M.A. Hybrid MAS Fault Location, Isolation, and Restoration for Smart Distribution System with Microgrids. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting (PESGM), Boston, MA, USA, 17–21 July 2016; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2016; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Han, Y.; Zhang, K.; Li, H.; Coelho, E.A.A.; Guerrero, J.M. MAS-Based Distributed Coordinated Control and Optimization in Microgrid and Microgrid Clusters: A Comprehensive Overview. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2017, 33, 6488–6508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hua, H.; Li, Y.; Wang, T.; Dong, N.; Li, W.; Cao, J. Edge Computing with Artificial Intelligence: A Machine Learning Perspective. ACM Comput. Surv. 2023, 55, 1–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, F.; Zhang, M.; Wang, X.; Ma, X.; Liu, J. Deep Learning for Edge Computing Applications: A State-of-the-Art Survey. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 58322–58336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, X.; Han, Y.; Leung, V.C.M.; Niyato, D.; Yan, X.; Chen, X. Convergence of Edge Computing and Deep Learning: A Comprehensive Survey. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2020, 22, 869–904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, J.; Ran, X. Deep Learning with Edge Computing: A Review. Proc. IEEE 2019, 107, 1655–1674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Murshed, M.G.S.; Murphy, C.; Hou, D.; Khan, N.; Ananthanarayanan, G.; Hussain, F. Machine Learning at the Network Edge: A Survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 2021, 54, 1–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Logenthiran, T. Multi-Agent System for Control and Management of Distributed Power Systems. Ph.D Thesis, National University of Singapore, Singapore, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Dou, C.; Hao, D.; Jin, B.; Wang, W.; An, N. Multi-agent-system-based decentralized coordinated control for large power systems. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2014, 63, 814–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farid, A.M. Multi-agent system design principles for resilient coordination & control of future power systems. Intell. Ind. Syst. 2015, 1, 13–34. [Google Scholar]
- Herrera, M.; Pérez-Hernández, M.; Parlikad, A.; Izquierdo, J. Multi-Agent Systems and Complex Networks: Review and Applications in Systems Engineering. Processes 2020, 8, 312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharifi, L. Economics Inspired Energy Aware Service Provisioning in P2P Assisted Cloud Ecosystems. Technico.Ulisboa.Pt 2015, 1, 72–98. Available online: https://web.tecnico.ulisboa.pt/~ist14191/repository/Leila-Sharifi-CAT.pdf (accessed on 13 March 2025).
- Irfan, M.; Iqbal, J.; Iqbal, A.; Riaz, R.A. Opportunities and Challenges in Control of Smart Grids—Pakistani Perspective. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 7, 652–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aftab, M.A.; Hussain, S.M.S.; Ali, I.; Ustun, T.S. IEC 61850-Based Communication Layer Modeling for Electric Vehicles: Electric Vehicle Charging and Discharging Processes Based on the International Electrotechnical Commission 61850 Standard and Its Extensions. IEEE Ind. Electron. Mag. 2020, 14, 4–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mackiewicz, R.E. Overview of IEC 61850 and Benefits. In Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, Montreal, QC, Canada, 18–22 June 2006; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2006; p. 8. [Google Scholar]
- Youssef, T.A.; El Hariri, M.; Bugay, N.; Mohammed, O.A. IEC 61850: Technology Standards and Cyber-Threats. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 16th International Conference on Environment and Electrical Engineering (EEEIC), Florence, Italy, 7–10 June 2016; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2016; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Aftab, M.A.; Hussain, S.M.S.; Ali, I.; Ustun, T.S. IEC 61850-Based Substation Automation System: A Survey. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2020, 120, 106008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shin, I.J.; Song, B.K.; Eom, D.S. International Electronical Committee (IEC) 61850 Mapping with Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) in Smart Grids Based European Telecommunications Standard Institute Machine-to-Machine (M2M) Environment. Energies 2017, 10, 393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ozansoy, C.R.; Zayegh, A.; Kalam, A. Object Modeling of Data and Datasets in the International Standard IEC 61850. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 2009, 24, 1140–1147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kostic, T.; Preiss, O.; Frei, C. Understanding and Using the IEC 61850: A Case for Meta-Modelling. Comput. Stand. Interfaces 2005, 27, 679–695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ihle, C.; Trautwein, D.; Schubotz, M.; Meuschke, N.; Gipp, B. Incentive Mechanisms in Peer-to-Peer Networks—A Systematic Literature Review. ACM Comput. Surv. 2023, 55 (Suppl. S14), 1–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reckerd, D.; Vico, J. Application of Peer-to-Peer Communication, for Protection and Control, at Seward Distribution Substation. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Conference for Protective Relay Engineers, College Station, TX, USA, 5–7 April 2005; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2005; pp. 40–45. [Google Scholar]
- Wojdak, W. Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol: A New Solution from an Old Technology. Reprinted from CompactPCI Systems March 2003. Available online: http://pdf.cloud.opensystemsmedia.com/advancedtca-systems.com/PerfTech.Mar03.pdf (accessed on 13 March 2025).
- Marchese, M.; Mongelli, M. Simple Protocol Enhancements of Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol Over Ring Topologies. Comput. Netw. 2012, 56, 1131–1151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pallos, R.; Farkas, J.; Moldovan, I.; Lukovszki, C. Performance of Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol in Access and Metro Networks. In Proceedings of the 2007 Second International Conference on Access Networks & Workshops, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 22–24 August 2007; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2007; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar]
- Li, Q.; Wang, D.; Huang, X.; Zhang, H. A System Configuration Description Language (SCL) Complied File Based Configuration Method for Bridges in Smart Substation. In Proceedings of the 2023 7th International Conference on Smart Grid and Smart Cities (ICSGSC), Lanzhou, China, 22–24 September 2023; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2023; pp. 136–141. [Google Scholar]
- Cruz, J.P.; Kaji, Y.; Yanai, N. RBAC-SC: Role-Based Access Control Using Smart Contract. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 12240–12251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zeeshan, M.; Manzoor, M.F.; Qadir, J. Backup Channel and Cooperative Channel Switching On-Demand Routing Protocol for Multi-Hop Cognitive Radio Ad Hoc Networks (BCCCS). In Proceedings of the 2010 6th International Conference on Emerging Technologies (ICET), Islamabad, Pakistan, 18–19 October 2010; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2010; pp. 394–399. [Google Scholar]
- Ahmad, A.; El Haffar, A.; Lavanya, P. Moving towards reliable and fault-tolerant smart grid systems. Int. J. Adv. Res. Electr. Electron. Instrum. Eng. 2023, 1, 508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Essackjee, I.A. Leveraging disruptive technologies to realize the smart grid. ResearchGate 2023, 1, 346402311. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ismael-Essackjee/publication/346402311_Leveraging_Disruptive_Technologies_to_Realize_the_Smart_Grid/links/62a23ada55273755ebe07e71/Leveraging-Disruptive-Technologies-to-Realize-the-Smart-Grid.pdf (accessed on 14 March 2025).
- De Almeida, L.F.F.; Pereira, L.A.M.; Sodré, A.C. Control networks and smart grid teleprotection: Key aspects, technologies, protocols, and case-studies. IEEE Access 2020, 1, 9200485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alabi, M. The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Network Optimization in Telecommunications. ResearchGate 2023, 1, 384664972. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Moses-Alabi/publication/384664972_The_Impact_of_Artificial_Intelligence_on_Network_Optimization_in_Telecommunications/links/6701933d9e6e82486f0549d5/The-Impact-of-Artificial-Intelligence-on-Network-Optimization-in-Telecommunications.pdf (accessed on 14 March 2025).
- Umoga, U.J.; Sodiya, E.O.; Ugwuanyi, E.D.; Jacks, B.S.; Lottu, O.A.; Daraojimba, O.D.; Obaigbena, A. Exploring the potential of AI-driven optimization in enhancing network performance and efficiency. Magna Sci. Adv. Res. Rev. 2024, 10, 368–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cruz, Y.J.; Castaño, F.; Haber, R.E.; Villalonga, A.; Ejsmont, K.; Gladysz, B.; Flores, Á.; Alemany, P. Self-Reconfiguration for Smart Manufacturing Based on Artificial Intelligence: A Review and Case Study. In Artificial Intelligence in Manufacturing: Enabling Intelligent, Flexible and Cost-Effective Production Through AI; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2024; pp. 121–144. [Google Scholar]
- Lin, Y.; Bie, Z. A review of key strategies in realizing power system resilience. Glob. Energy Interconnect. 2018, 1, 2096511718300094. Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2096511718300094 (accessed on 14 March 2025).
- Yu, P.; Shi, L.; Liu, B. Survivability-aware routing restoration mechanism for smart grid communication network in large-scale failures. EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw. 2020, 1, 104. Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13638-020-1653-4 (accessed on 14 March 2025).
- Moradi, M.H.; Razini, S.; Hosseinian, S.M. State of the art of multi-agent systems in power engineering: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 58, 814–824. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, L.; Yu, T. Smart Dispatching for Energy Internet with Complex Cyber-Physical-Social Systems: A Parallel Dispatch Perspective. Int. J. Energy Res. 2019, 43, 3080–3133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheng, L.; Yu, T.; Zhang, X.; Yin, L. Machine Learning for Energy and Electric Power Systems: State of the Art and Prospects. Autom. Electr. Power Syst. 2019, 43, 15–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Renugadevi, R.; Shobana, J.; Arthi, K.; AV, K.; Satishkumar, D.; Sivaraja, M. Real-Time Applications of Artificial Intelligence Technology in Daily Operations. In Using Real-Time Data and AI for Thrust Manufacturing; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2024; pp. 243–257. [Google Scholar]
- Cen, J.; Yang, Z.; Liu, X.; Xiong, J.; Chen, H. A Review of Data-Driven Machinery Fault Diagnosis Using Machine Learning Algorithms. J. Vib. Eng. Technol. 2022, 10, 2481–2507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diez-Olivan, A.; Del Ser, J.; Galar, D.; Sierra, B. Data Fusion and Machine Learning for Industrial Prognosis: Trends and Perspectives Towards Industry 4.0. Inf. Fusion 2019, 50, 92–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernandes, M.; Corchado, J.M.; Marreiros, G. Machine Learning Techniques Applied to Mechanical Fault Diagnosis and Fault Prognosis in the Context of Real Industrial Manufacturing Use-Cases: A Systematic Literature Review. Appl. Intell. 2022, 52, 14246–14280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saufi, S.R.; Ahmad, Z.A.B.; Leong, M.S.; Lim, M.H. Challenges and Opportunities of Deep Learning Models for Machinery Fault Detection and Diagnosis: A Review. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 122644–122662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leite, D.; Martins Jr, A.; Rativa, D.; De Oliveira, J.F.; Maciel, A.M. An Automated Machine Learning Approach for Real-Time Fault Detection and Diagnosis. Sensors 2022, 22, 6138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jung, K.H.; Kim, H.; Ko, Y. Network Reconfiguration Algorithm for Automated Distribution Systems Based on Artificial Intelligence Approach. IEEE Trans. Power Deliv. 1993, 8, 1933–1941. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shakiba, F.M.; Azizi, S.M.; Zhou, M.; Abusorrah, A. Application of Machine Learning Methods in Fault Detection and Classification of Power Transmission Lines: A Survey. Artif. Intell. Rev. 2023, 56, 5799–5836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bruton, K.; Raftery, P.; Kennedy, B.; Keane, M.M.; O’sullivan, D.T.J. Review of Automated Fault Detection and Diagnostic Tools in Air Handling Units. Energy Effic. 2014, 7, 335–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fenton, W.G.; McGinnity, T.M.; Maguire, L.P. Fault Diagnosis of Electronic Systems Using Intelligent Techniques: A Review. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C 2001, 31, 269–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, D.; Zheng, A.; Yu, W.; Cao, H.; Ling, Q.; Liu, J.; Zhou, D. Digital Twin Technology in Transportation Infrastructure: A Comprehensive Survey of Current Applications, Challenges, and Future Directions. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 1911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arora, S.; Tewari, A. AI-Driven Resilience: Enhancing Critical Infrastructure with Edge Computing. Int. J. Curr. Eng. Technol. 2022, 12, 151–157. [Google Scholar]
- Nasarian, E.; Alizadehsani, R.; Acharya, U.R.; Tsui, K.L. Designing interpretable ML system to enhance trust in healthcare: A systematic review to propose responsible clinician-AI-collaboration framework. Inf. Fusion 2024, 108, 102412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- KN, K.; Perrusquia, A.; Tsourdos, A.; Ignatyev, D. Integrating Explainable AI into Two-Tier ML Models for Trustworthy Aircraft Landing Gear Fault Diagnosis. In AIAA SCITECH 2025 Forum; American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics: Reston, VA, USA, 2025; p. 1928. [Google Scholar]
- Nguyen, T.T.; Nguyen, N.D.; Nahavandi, S. Deep reinforcement learning for multiagent systems: A review of challenges, solutions, and applications. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 2020, 50, 3826–3839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cross, L.; Cockburn, J.; Yue, Y.; O’Doherty, J.P. Using deep reinforcement learning to reveal how the brain encodes abstract state-space representations in high-dimensional environments. Neuron 2021, 109, 724–738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Altaher, A. Implementation of a Dependability Framework for Smart Substation Automation Systems: Application to Electric Energy Distribution. Ph.D. Thesis, Université Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Baigent, D.; Adamiak, M.; Mackiewicz, R.; Sisco, G.M.G.M. IEC 61850 Communication Networks and Systems in Substations: An Overview for Users; SISCO Systems: Sterling Heights, MI, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Cappart, Q.; Chételat, D.; Khalil, E.B.; Lodi, A.; Morris, C.; Veličković, P. Combinatorial optimization and reasoning with graph neural networks. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2023, 24, 1–61. [Google Scholar]
- Alex-Omiogbemi, A.A.; Sule, A.K.; Omowole, B.M. Conceptual framework for advancing regulatory compliance and risk management in emerging markets through digital innovation. World J. Adv. Res. Rev. Dec. 2024, 24, 1155–1162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, X.; Wu, Y.C. Balancing innovation and regulation in the age of generative artificial intelligence. J. Inf. Policy 2024, 14, 93–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Comparative Dimension | Self-Healing in Power and Energy Systems | Self-Healing in Metro Power Supply Systems | Typical Scenarios, Application Levels, and Definitional Differences |
---|---|---|---|
Primary Objective | Ensures wide-area safety and reliability, promptly isolates faults, and restores service to critical loads across transmission and distribution. | Focuses on swiftly identifying and isolating faults within confined metro lines, minimizing operational disruption, and sustaining continuous train service. | In power systems, self-healing primarily targets large-scale networks. In metro systems, it aims at uninterrupted public transit. Both emphasize isolation and quick restoration, yet metro systems impose more stringent continuity requirements. |
Network Scale and Complexity | Comprises hierarchical generation, transmission, and distribution across vast geographic regions, integrating both conventional and distributed energy resources. | Concentrates on urban rail corridors, with relatively fixed routing but complex operational environments; traction loads exhibit cyclical fluctuations with high power demands. | Power systems handle multi-voltage-level, widely dispersed networks. Metro systems focus on shorter feeder sections and specialized loads. Both require robust control, but metro systems demand faster, more localized responses. |
Control and Management Layers | Typically includes a layered architecture with a central energy management system (energy management system (EMS)/supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA)), substation automation, and distributed control in feeder terminals. | Employs centralized or semi-centralized control via SCADA or integrated supervisory control systems (ISCSs), with shorter communication pathways for rapid switching actions. | Power systems rely on multi-tier communications for broad-area coordination. Metro systems maintain shorter command chains, enabling near-instantaneous protection and recovery. The underlying definitions emphasize automation, but with distinct time horizons. |
Fault Types and Detection | Encompasses conventional short-circuits, equipment aging, and severe external disruptions (e.g., lightning, ice storms). Fault detection relies on diverse sensors, relays, and advanced topology analyses. | Primarily contends with feeder or substation faults (e.g., short-circuits, overloads), external threats from construction, and environmental factors damaging contact lines; detection uses specialized track sensors. | General power systems confront a wider range of fault types, while metro faults typically concentrate on contact-line or substation issues. Both emphasize real-time detection, though metro systems have elevated safety margins due to passenger transport. |
Fault Isolation and Network Reconfiguration | Achieves isolation through automated breakers, reclosers, and load transfer, often within seconds to minutes; integrates alternative power sources to maintain supply continuity. | Relies on ring-supplied networks and rapid switching to isolate faulty sections while sustaining feeder services to unaffected track segments, typically within a matter of seconds or less. | Both leverage automated switches and feeder reconfiguration. However, metro systems often need a faster (sub-minute to second-level) approach to preserve critical train operations without substantial delays. |
Information and Communication Technologies | Relies on multi-level, wide-area networks (optical fiber, wireless, private lines) with numerous nodes and potential bandwidth constraints; designed for comprehensive monitoring and control. | Benefits from relatively shorter distances and more centralized configurations, typically integrated into a single specialized or semi-isolated communication framework with low latency. | Both necessitate reliable, real-time communication. Yet, power systems face more distributed deployments, whereas metro systems can leverage a dedicated, smaller-scale communication backbone. |
Reliability and Safety Standards | Must comply with national or industry regulations (e.g., SAIDI (system average interruption duration index), SAIFI (system average interruption frequency index)) and increasingly consider cybersecurity challenges; reliability is critical but often measured statistically across larger geographic footprints. | Stringent safety standards and zero tolerance for lengthy service interruptions, given its direct impact on public transit; also must consider passenger evacuation and emergency scenarios in fault response. | Both strive for high reliability, but metro systems face more immediate safety and service pressures. Definitions converge on the principle of minimizing power interruption, though metro systems place human safety and operational continuity at the forefront. |
Current Implementation and Trends | Already deployed widely in smart distribution grids internationally, with varying degrees of investment and maturity; advanced sensors, grid automation, and microgrid technologies are growing rapidly. | Actively being integrated into new and existing metro lines worldwide; especially in newer constructions, self-healing features are incorporated during design to minimize service interruption times and enhance safety. | Power grids and metro systems both advance toward greater intelligence and automation, but metro self-healing is more domain-specific and dedicated to ensuring passenger service. Definitions reflect macroscopic grid security vs. localized transit continuity. |
Aspect | Power and Energy System Application | Subway Power Supply Application | Level of Implementation | Differences in Implementation | Future Potential | Urgent Challenges | Research Opportunities |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Topological Complexity | Typically radial or meshed network designs | Hybrid ring/radial topologies under tight constraints | Medium to high | Limited space for additional cables; strict safety requirements | Enhanced modeling tools | Integrating advanced sensors in limited space | Compact, scalable approaches for real-time fault management |
Load Variability | Seasonal/diurnal load patterns | Rapid load changes due to train acceleration | Medium | High-frequency fluctuations unique to rail traction | Predictive analytics for dynamic load management | Handling transient conditions in real-time detection | AI-driven adaptive protection schemes |
Fault Tolerance Requirements | Important but can rely on alternative feeders | Critical: passenger safety at stake | High | Stricter recovery times; mandatory redundancies in underground segments | Seamless reconfiguration for uninterrupted service | Maintaining safety with minimal downtime | MAS-based solutions that integrate safety logic |
Infrastructure Constraints | Often more flexible, especially above ground | Very limited corridor space; complex cable routing | Low to medium | Equipment miniaturization needed; advanced maintenance scheduling | Innovative hardware designs | High costs of retrofitting and expansion | Modular protective devices optimized for underground environment |
Environmental Factors (Heat, Humidity, etc.) | Relevant but typically less extreme | Critical in enclosed tunnels | Medium | Ventilation and cooling demands must be integrated with power layout | Energy-efficient solutions for underground ventilation | Protective devices degrade faster due to harsh conditions | Designing robust sensors and switchgear suited to harsh environments |
Communication Constraints | Generally open space for wireless or fiber links | Underground layout complicates communication wiring | Medium | Signal attenuation in tunnels; need for robust communication protocols | Advanced tunnel communication frameworks | Ensuring real-time data flow under challenging conditions | Research on fault-tolerant communication for tunnel environments |
Maintenance and Operational Constraints | Significant but often can schedule downtime | Very limited track closure windows | Medium to high | Maintenance must be performed swiftly, often in off-peak or night hours | Autonomous or remote inspection tools | High operational risk if maintenance is delayed | Development of continuous monitoring systems and predictive maintenance |
Regulatory and Safety Standards | National grid codes and industry standards | Stricter local transit authority regulations | High | Safety certification for every component or software module | Holistic compliance with railway regulations | Multiple approvals from transportation authorities | Integrated safety frameworks bridging power and rail standards |
Aspect/Constraint | Proposed Interventions | Implementation Status | Key Benefits | Limitations/Barriers | Future Potential | Urgent Challenges | Research Directions |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Space Constraints and Equipment Size | Miniaturized switchgear, compact substations, solid-state | Early adoption in some metros | Saves valuable tunnel space, eases retrofitting | Higher cost, potential reliability issues | Medium to high | Testing and safety certifications | Developing robust, affordable miniaturized devices |
High Load Variability | AI-based predictive load balancing, advanced SCADA | In pilot projects | Accurate forecasting, improved real-time control | Requires extensive sensor data, complex algorithms | High | Ensuring real-time responsiveness | Machine learning algorithms for real-time load prediction |
Environmental Challenges (Heat, Humidity) | Enhanced insulation, specialized cooling systems | Widely used but needs updates | Protects equipment longevity, improves reliability | Increases CAPEX/OPEX, depends on ventilation design | Medium | Integrating with energy efficiency | Smart materials, advanced sensor-based heat management |
Fault Tolerance and Rapid Isolation | MAS-based reconfiguration, advanced protective relaying | Experimental or partial use | Minimizes downtime, enhances passenger safety | Requires robust communication and standard protocols | High | Fast, secure communications | MAS architecture aligning with IEC 61850 and railway codes |
Communication and Data Synchronization | IEC 61850 GOOSE messaging, fiber-optic and wireless hybrids | Expanding in pilot programs | Enables real-time data sharing, simplified integration | Tunnel attenuation and installation complexity | High | Guaranteed QoS in tunnel environment | Ultra-reliable communication protocols for underground rail |
Maintenance and Operational Scheduling | Predictive maintenance, digital twins, remote inspection | Growing adoption | Minimizes downtime, reduces costs, extends asset life | Requires high initial investment, specialized staff | Very High | Coordinating track closures | AI-driven digital twins for continuous condition monitoring |
Regulatory Compliance and Safety | Unified standards bridging power and railway domains | Ongoing efforts | Streamlines certification, ensures compatibility | Multiple authorities, differing regulations | High | Prolonged approvals | Collaborative frameworks for standardization |
Cybersecurity Tools | End-to-end encryption, intrusion detection systems | Varies by region | Protects critical control systems from cyber threats | Requires advanced IT infrastructure | High | Ensuring trust in automated systems | AI-based anomaly detection integrated with self-healing |
Aspect | Power and Energy Systems Application | Subway Power Supply Application | Level of Implementation | Differences in Implementation | Future Potential | Urgent Challenges | Research Opportunities |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fault Detection Speed | Millisecond to second range | Must be sub-cycle to tens of milliseconds | Medium to high | Higher sensitivity due to enclosed spaces and passenger risk | Very high (real-time control) | Achieving ultra-fast detection in tunnels | Wavelet-based traveling-wave methods |
Isolation Techniques | Circuit breakers at multiple nodes | Limited breakers, need precise isolation zones | Medium | Space constraints, higher cost for extra switchgear | Medium to high | Minimizing downtime in short track segments | MAS-based isolation protocols |
Restoration Priority | Typically based on load importance | Safety-critical loads top priority (lighting) | High | Focus on passenger evacuation and ventilation requirements | High | Ensuring continuous service with minimal risk | Hierarchical multi-agent strategies |
Communication and Coordination | SCADA systems, sometimes distributed | Underground environment with possible signal loss | Medium to high | Signal attenuation in tunnels; need for robust communication protocols | Very high | Reliable data exchange under ground conditions | IEC 61850-based GOOSE in tunnels |
Automation Level | Moderate to advanced in smart grids | Rapidly evolving with pilot tests in subways | Low to medium | Standard solutions less tested in subterranean rail networks | High | Balancing new tech with proven reliability | Full-scale, integrated MASs + AI systems |
Data Handling and Analytics | Cloud-based or on-premise analytics | On-site edge computing for real-time decisions | Growing | High real-time constraints, limited data bandwidth | High | Managing large-scale sensor data in real time | Edge AI algorithms for fault prediction |
Reliability and Redundancy | Important for major loads, less for small feeders | Critical for all track sections | High | Redundancies have to be physically feasible underground | Very high | Ensuring no single point of failure | Optimized redundancy planning |
Cost and Investment | Balanced with broad utility budgets | Constrained by transit authority budgets | Varies | High capital expenditures for specialized rail infrastructure | Medium | Gaining stakeholder support | Economic feasibility studies |
Aspect/Technology | Current Adoption | Primary Advantage | Limitations | Future Potential | Urgent Challenges | Research Gaps | Recommended Solutions/Directions |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
High-Speed Protection Relays | Moderate | Sub-cycle response, improved sensitivity | Prone to nuisance tripping under variable load | High | Tuning relay settings to subway load patterns | Algorithm refinement for multi-condition loads | Customized relay settings with AI-based adaptation |
Wavelet-Based Fault Detection | Pilot | Accurate detection of transient signals | Computational complexity in real time | Medium to High | Guaranteeing stable performance under noise | Optimal wavelet design for DC traction signals | Hybrid wavelet + machine learning methods |
Traveling Wave Methods | Limited | Precise fault localization | Requires synchronized data acquisition | High | Installing enough sensors in short intervals | Cost-effective sensor deployment | Cooperative traveling wave detection systems |
MAS-based Isolation | Experimental | Distributed decision-making, resilience | Complexity of agent coordination protocols | Very High | Achieving sub-second isolation in tunnels | Standardizing MAS frameworks for rail settings | IEC 61850-compatible MAS design |
Self-Healing Restoration Logic | Early prototypes | Automated service restoration, dynamic re-routing | Requires robust network modeling | Medium to High | Handling partial restorations effectively | Real-time load and system state estimation | MAS-based restoration integrated with SCADA |
AI/ML for Fault Prediction | Emerging | Predictive maintenance, early anomaly detection | Data scarcity, labeling issues, validation costs | Very High | Ensuring model accuracy in changing conditions | Neural network interpretability and reliability | Hybrid physics-informed neural networks |
Edge Computing in Substations | Low but growing | Reduces latency, improves local decision-making | Limited computational resources on site | High | Onboard analytics to handle real-time data | Designing low-power, high-performance hardware | Embedded systems optimized for fault analytics |
Cybersecurity Compliance | Varies by region | Protects reliability of automated fault systems | Additional cost and complexity | High | Mitigating increased attack surface | Secure data frameworks integrated with self-healing | Blockchain-based identity and access management |
Aspect | Power and Energy Systems Application | Subway Power Supply Application | Level of Implementation | Differences in Implementation | Future Potential | Urgent Challenges | Research Opportunities |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Regulatory Frameworks | Utility-level codes (IEEE, IEC), less direct public scrutiny | Multi-layered railway authority oversight, strict passenger safety | Medium | Longer certification processes, overlapping authorities | Medium to high | Streamlining multi-agency approvals | Standardization bridging IEC 61850 and rail codes |
Safety Assurance | Important but primarily equipment-focused | Critical for passenger well-being; zero tolerance for major failures | High | Need for rapid evacuation, air quality, and lighting continuity | High | Minimizing disruptions that endanger passengers | MAS designs incorporating real-time hazard monitoring |
Legacy System Integration | Often stepwise modernization | Legacy traction power systems with partial SCADA | Low to medium | Protocol mismatch, older hardware with minimal digital interfaces | Medium | Retrofitting with minimal service downtime | Adaptive hardware modules, protocol converters |
Standards and Protocols | Common adoption of IEC 61850 in substation automation | Emerging adaptation for traction power and MAS coordination | Low to medium | Must handle DC traction specifics, tunnel conditions | High | Harmonizing substation automation with rail codes | IEC 61850 profiles specialized for traction systems |
Cost vs. Benefit Analysis | Long-term cost-benefit for large-scale utilities | Immediate passenger service impact, budget constraints | Medium | Hard to quantify intangible benefits (e.g., safety, brand image) | Medium | Securing investments under strict budget caps | Detailed ROI models including passenger satisfaction |
Training and Workforce | Utility engineers, typical skill sets | Specialized rail engineers, safety certifications | Low to medium | Additional training for advanced AI/MAS solutions | High | Building cross-functional teams | Education programs bridging power and rail domains |
Public Acceptance and Trust | Generally behind-the-scenes updates | High visibility with potential passenger disruption | Medium to high | Risk of negative perception if technology causes downtime | Medium | Ensuring stable operation during pilot phases | Transparent communication about improvements |
Cybersecurity Compliance | Growing awareness, diverse regulations | Vital to protect passenger and operational data | Medium | Potential for large-scale disruptions if hacked | High | Ensuring end-to-end security in tunnels | Integrated intrusion detection with MAS frameworks |
Strategy/Measure | Adoption Level | Expected Impact | Implementation Difficulty | Key Benefits | Potential Risks/Barriers | Research Needs | Future Outlook |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Unified Standardization Efforts | Growing momentum | Streamlines compliance across agencies and vendors | Medium | Reduced project delays, interoperability | Requires consensus among diverse stakeholders | Holistic standards for MASs + traction power systems | Feasible with continued collaboration among IEC, IEEE, rail authorities |
Cross-Domain Training Programs | Limited pilots | Enhances workforce competency in both power and rail | Medium to high | Facilitates smooth technology integration | Budget constraints, scheduling complexities | Curriculum design integrating railway safety and AI | Key to building a sustainable talent pipeline |
Pilot and Sandbox Environments | Emerging in some metros | Allows safe testing of new systems in controlled settings | Medium | Minimizes risk to passengers, validates ROI | May still require partial line closures | Detailed performance metrics, extended pilot durations | Gradual system-wide rollouts after proven success |
Modular Retrofit Approaches | Limited | Incrementally modernizes legacy systems | High | Avoids complete system overhaul, spreads cost | Complexity of ensuring compatibility | Adaptive hardware modules, protocol converters | Could become standard practice for older metro lines |
Risk–Benefit Communication | Ad hoc | Improves public acceptance and stakeholder engagement | Low to medium | Builds trust, eases implementation controversies | Requires public outreach, specialized messaging | Communication frameworks and standardized ROI metrics | Crucial for ensuring supportive regulatory environment |
Comprehensive Cybersecurity | Growing awareness | Safeguards data integrity, essential for MASs/AI systems | Medium | Avoids catastrophic disruptions, protects passenger data | Costly to maintain, evolving threat landscape | Intrusion detection, endpoint security for IEDs | Integral part of future integrated self-healing systems |
Funding and Incentive Mechanisms | Region-dependent | Encourages R&D investment and pilot deployment | Medium to high | Facilitates advanced research, reduces operator risk | Political and economic uncertainties | Economic models that quantify intangible benefits | Key to bridging the gap between research and real deployment |
Long-Term Maintenance Contracts | Limited | Ensures continuous expert support post-deployment | Medium | Maximizes system reliability, knowledge transfer | Potential vendor lock-in | Service-level agreements with advanced penalty clauses | A stable framework for ensuring reliability over the system lifetime |
Comparison Criteria | Current Self-Healing Techniques | Suggested Self-Healing Strategy |
---|---|---|
Technology Foundation | Traditional Fault Detection Algorithms: Based on simple fault detection (e.g., overcurrent, voltage drop) and subsequent isolation using conventional relays. | AI-based MASs: Utilizes real-time data analysis and intelligent agents that communicate autonomously to identify, localize, and isolate faults more efficiently. |
Fault Detection Speed | Typically requires several cycles to detect and isolate faults, leading to delayed responses in high-speed environments like subways. | Detects faults in fractions of a cycle (using wavelet-based techniques), significantly improving detection time in high-speed subway systems. |
System Flexibility | Often fixed in design, requiring manual intervention or predetermined responses to faults. | Highly flexible, where agents adapt and optimize their responses based on changing conditions in real time, offering greater scalability. |
Real-Time Adaptability | Limited real-time adaptability, as conventional methods use static rules for fault isolation. | Uses AI to adapt fault recovery strategies in real time, considering dynamic load and environmental factors, especially in urban settings with complex network topologies. |
Resilience to Complex Topologies | Struggles in complex network topologies (e.g., ring or radial configurations) as there are fixed paths for fault detection and isolation. | MAS-based strategy is inherently more suited for complex network topologies, allowing autonomous decision-making across distributed systems. |
Failure Recovery Efficiency | Traditional methods often lead to long recovery times and may not restore service to critical areas promptly. | MASs enable rapid rerouting of power through alternate paths in real time, ensuring minimal downtime and prioritized restoration of critical services such as lighting and ventilation. |
Space Constraints | Conventional systems use additional hardware (e.g., circuit breakers) which may be difficult to install in confined spaces such as subway tunnels. | MASs use distributed sensors and devices (without the need for additional hardware), facilitating more compact and space-efficient implementations. |
Maintenance and Scalability | Requires regular maintenance of each individual component, and expanding the system often requires significant hardware upgrades. | MASs require less hardware maintenance and can be scaled up by adding more intelligent agents, making them easier to adapt and expand. |
Safety Protocols | Basic safety mechanisms (e.g., emergency power supply, fire safety) that activate in case of failure but often lack dynamic prioritization of critical services. | Integrates advanced safety protocols, ensuring that critical systems (e.g., lighting, ventilation) are always prioritized during fault isolation and power restoration. |
Cost | Lower initial cost but higher long-term costs due to maintenance, hardware upgrades, and manual intervention during fault recovery. | Higher initial setup cost for AI-based systems, but lower long-term costs due to reduced maintenance needs and quicker fault recovery, offsetting initial investments. |
Regulatory Compliance | Generally compliant with existing safety standards, but lacks integration with emerging AI-based regulations. | Requires new regulatory frameworks to accommodate AI-based systems, including certification of MAS- and AI-driven fault management protocols. |
Integration with Legacy Systems | Difficulty in integrating with older infrastructures, requiring hardware upgrades or complete system overhauls. | MASs can integrate with legacy systems via gateways, allowing for gradual upgrades without a complete system overhaul. |
Use of Data Analytics | Relies on limited data for fault detection, often with basic analysis on voltage, current, and fault type. | Uses advanced machine learning models that analyze vast datasets from multiple sensors to predict faults before they occur and optimize recovery strategies. |
Environmental Adaptability | Traditional systems are often static, and environmental factors (e.g., temperature, humidity) can impact their performance. | Adaptive MAS technology continuously adjusts to environmental conditions such as temperature or humidity, enhancing system resilience in diverse settings like subway tunnels. |
Application Scenario | Degree of Adoption | Main Differences vs. Conventional Methods | Future Prospects | Key Challenges | Potential Research Directions | Implementation Complexity | Current Deployments | Estimated Cost | Strategic Importance |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fault Diagnostics | Medium | Distributed vs. centralized analysis | High, with advanced AI pattern matching | Standardization of agent protocols | Agent-based feature extraction, big data | Moderate | Some pilot projects in major cities | Moderate | Very high for timely response |
Fault Isolation and Restoration | High | Faster local control decisions | Expansion into microgrid or hybrid | Communication security | Autonomous agent negotiation algorithms | High | Widely tested internationally | High (due to new device requirements) | Critical for system safety and operation |
System Reconfiguration | Moderate | Cooperative agent-based switching | Multi-level architecture | Reliability of real-time signals | Hybrid MAS-IEC 61850 integration | Moderate | Ongoing research initiatives | Medium | Essential for robust self-healing |
Load Shedding | Low | Intelligent selective dropping vs. global | Potentially large in future DC traction | Complexity in load forecasting | Agent-based optimization with historical data | Low to moderate | Rare field demos | Low | Important for emergency readiness |
Predictive Maintenance | Low | Online prognosis vs. reactive upkeep | Growing, particularly with big data | Accuracy of machine learning methods | Deep learning integrated with MASs | Moderate | Conceptual studies ongoing | Medium | Enhances preventive strategies |
Voltage Regulation | Moderate | Distributed voltage control vs. single | High in smart-grid expansions | Coordinated agent control frameworks | MAS-based dynamic VAR control | Moderate | Some pilot tests | Medium | Improves power quality and reliability |
Power Quality Monitoring | Low | Real-time harmonic detection vs. offline | Emerging with new sensor technologies | Limited coverage of sensor networks | MAS-based harmonic mitigation techniques | Moderate to high | Minimal large-scale deployments | Medium–high | Boosts passenger experience |
Microgrid Integration | Emerging | Local agent-based decisions vs. central SCADA | Potential synergy with renewable and storage in depots | Technical maturity in AC/DC hybrid systems | MAS strategies for integrated AC/DC grids | High (novel tech) | Few advanced pilots | High | Key for future urban rail expansions |
Energy Management | Moderate | Intelligent routing of feeders and loads | Large, with data-driven analytics | MAS coordination of traction loads | Cooperative scheduling with power flow control | Moderate | Under study | Medium | Affects cost optimization |
Security Assessment | Low | Real-time multi-agent vigilance vs. static approaches | Likely critical with growing threats | Cybersecurity integration | MAS-based anomaly detection and intrusion response | High | Conceptual prototypes | Medium | Ensures reliability and safety |
Research Focus | Current State | Potential Evolution | Key Technical Barriers | Unique Subway Constraints | Synergy with Other Technologies (5G, Edge AI) | Real-Time Simulation Capabilities | Scalability | Funding and Collaboration | Projected Long-Term Impact |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Agent Coordination | Experimental pilots in academic settings | Larger multi-level hierarchical models within an IEC 61850 environment | Communication latency and security | AC/DC mixture in traction systems | Integrated platform for distributed intelligence | High-fidelity agent-based simulation with real-time data injection | Moderate; advanced control algorithms needed | Government + private railway operators | Possibly transformative, enabling advanced self-healing frameworks |
Resilient Architecture for Fault Handling | Conceptual designs only | Full integration with standardized protocols (IEC 61850) | Dynamic stability and real-time demands | Frequent service runs with minimal downtime | Cloud-edge synergy for real-time data analytics and AI-based forecasting | Testing under stress conditions, hardware-in-the-loop evaluations | High, must handle large expansions | Partnerships among academia and metro agencies | Potential to drastically reduce service disruptions |
Multi-Agent Security and Cyber-Resilience | Emerging topic, few publications | Integrated self-healing + intrusion detection architecture | Lack of robust agent intrusion detection and incomplete policy | Threat potential from critical service lines | AI-driven intrusion detection and response | Simulation involving both operational tech (OT) and information tech (IT) | Moderate, as overhead on agent frameworks might be significant | Collaborative R&D with cybersecurity vendors and standard bodies | Could become essential as 5G and IoT expand the attack surface |
Integration with Big Data and Analytics | Limited integration for offline analysis | Full data-driven MAS control loops with streaming inputs | Complexity of data ingestion, real-time transformations (AC, DC, station, etc.) | High volume, multi-domain measurements | ML, deep learning-based advanced analytics for anomaly detection | Real-time streaming and batch processing synergy for agent training | High, as big data solutions require robust infrastructure | Industry–university collaboration crucial | Opens new avenues for predictive control, faster fault recovery |
Hierarchical vs. Decentralized Agents | Mostly hierarchical prototypes | Hybrid approaches combining local and centralized synergy | Inter-agent conflicts in fully distributed agent models | AC traction and DC feeding lines require different control logics | IoT-based sensing nodes for real-time data acquisition | Flexible scenario testing across different topologies (urban, suburban lines) | High for large networks wanting modular expansions | Global consortia and standard organizations | Could shape the next-gen topology management methods |
Application Scenario | Current Adoption Level | Key Benefits | Main Implementation Obstacles | Technical Gaps | Standard Extensions Being Explored | Scalability Concerns | Cost/Benefit Analysis | Industry Collaboration | Long-Term Outlook Avenues |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Protection and Control | High in new installations | Ultra-fast clearing times, standardized object modeling | Integration with legacy DC gear | Custom LN for DC traction needed | IEC 61850-90-6 for FLISR indicates expansions for distribution | Mostly manageable, as each station covers a limited number of IEDs | Positive ROI in the long run; short-term high investment | Joint pilots by OEMs and transit agencies | Key segment likely to see continuous growth |
GOOSE-Based Signaling | Moderate usage primarily in AC side | Millisecond-level event-driven control | Fine-tuning of network redundancy and VLANs | Overlapping VLAN, QoS configurations | Railway-specific LN expansions | Challenging in large city-wide systems but feasible | Often justified by improved reliability | Vendor-driven updates, global standardization | Expanding as reliability demands escalate |
Central Monitoring and SCADA Integration | High for new lines, partial retrofit in legacy lines | Standardized data acquisition, unified engineering | Coordinating data from diverse device types | Full mapping for older DC devices incomplete or vendor-proprietary | IEC 61850 in traction automation is under development beyond substation | System-level expansions in large subway networks | High initial cost, strong ROI in O&M savings over time | Partnerships with system integrators, local operators | Indispensable for future expansions in subways and electrified rail |
Condition Monitoring | Emerging interest | Uniform data model, improved predictive maintenance | Retrofitting sensors into older assets | Data volume and storage infrastructure | IEC 61850 extension for advanced sensors | Potentially large as new sensor deployments scale out | Potentially high initial investment, offset by O&M savings in the short term | Potential synergy with predictive maintenance platforms | Highly promising with AI strategies for improved reliability and safety |
Integration with MASs | Limited yet growing interest | Common data exchange framework with fast protocols | Achieving consistent LN naming and object structures for all AC/DC | Mapping agent tasks to LN objects remains a major barrier | Under development: bridging railway LN with agent logic (90-16 etc.) | Potentially seamless if standard LN definitions are carefully extended | Long-run ROI promising; short-run complexity high | Consortia for MAS-based standardization efforts are essential | Significant synergy with advanced self-healing capabilities |
Core Challenge | Real-World Impact | Underlying Cause | Potential Mitigations | Ongoing R&D Directions | Standardization Gaps | Implementation Costs | Stakeholder Collaboration | Scalability | Long-Term Opportunities |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Retrofitting Legacy Equipment | High in older lines with minimal budgets | Non-compatible IEDs, vendor-proprietary protocols | Gateway solutions, incremental hardware integration | Developing specialized engineering profiles | Limited LN definitions for DC traction elements and bridging logic | Medium (moderate hardware outlay) | Transit agencies, system integrators, vendors | Potentially low with well-planned modular upgrades | High, can extend system lifespan with minimal disruptions |
Security Threats to GOOSE/MMS | Potentially extreme disruptions to train services | Larger digital footprint, IP-based communications | Adoption of secure substation gating, role-based access, encryption, intrusion detection frameworks | Enhancing GOOSE, MMS security, emerging best practices | Not fully integrated into IEC 61850 documents | High (due to specialized cybersecurity hardware and software) | Collaboration with cybersecurity experts, standard bodies | High, as networks grow and more connected components are added | Enhanced reliability and passenger safety |
Complexity of LN/DO/DA Mapping | Risk of misconfigurations, hamper reliability | Many LN, DO, DA with cryptic nomenclatures in large networks | Rigorous workforce training, improved SCL tools, compliance checks, advanced engineering software | Tools for automated SCL checks, global LN expansions for traction | Some LN expansions not widely implemented globally | Medium | Vendor synergy crucial to ensure consistent naming and modeling | Medium, partial automation feasible for new lines with minimal manual overhead | Streamlined expansions for new lines with minimal manual overhead |
High-Speed Communication | Vital for self-healing performance but can be limited | GOOSE, SMV traffic congestion or suboptimal routing | QoS management, VLAN segmentation, robust redundancy protocols | Designing advanced traffic shaping and ring redundancy protocols, ongoing expansions for time synchronization | PTP profiles for time synchronization in traction context | Moderate to high (switches, network) | Industry alliances and communication vendors bridging train operators | High if network architecture is well designed from the start | Real-time detection and response enhancements |
Deployment Scenario | Network Configuration | MAS Scope of Control | IEC 61850 Layer Usage | Integration Complexity | Performance Requirements | Initial Investment | Scalability | Stakeholder Involvement | Long-Term Feasibility |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Full Greenfield | New lines with fully digital substations and advanced control | End-to-end, covering AC and DC feeders, station-based MASs, protection, MMS for supervisory tasks | GOOSE for real-time protection, MMS for supervisory tasks | Medium (designed from scratch to incorporate MASs+IEC 61850 synergy) | High reliability, ultra-low latency needed | Relatively high, but offset by lower future O&M costs | High potential to add new stations, lines seamlessly | Turnkey solution from major manufacturers | Very high; standardized frameworks remain relevant for decades |
Partial Retrofit | Existing lines with some digital and some analog equipment | Focus on station-based AC feeder switching or DC traction auto-reconfiguration | GOOSE bridging older and modern devices, MMS for SCADA overlay | High, due to mismatch among legacy gear, older comm protocols, and new LN definitions | Moderate reliability, improved reaction times needed | Moderate to high, given new hardware (protocol gateways, partial re-wiring) | Potentially moderate expansions if planning is carefully carried out | Collaboration with domain experts, vendor interoperability | Feasible, but requires methodical phase-based approach |
Station-Focused Deployment | Only substation-level architecture with ring or dual LAN | MASs handle localized fault detection and equipment monitoring | GOOSE for protective actions, limited MMS to station-level agent | Medium, as the scope is confined, but integration with existing station IEDs | Local reliability within stations, no wide-area reconfiguration | Low to moderate, as fewer devices require standard LN definitions | Limited but can be scaled to multiple stations | Typically station staff plus specialized MAS integrators | High for localized improvements; partial but effective |
R&D Focus | Current Exploration | Anticipated Challenges | Proposed Solutions | Dependencies | Potential Impact | Multi-Domain Synergies | Stakeholder Cooperation | Funding Opportunities | Roadmap Timeline |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AI-Driven Prediction and Forecasting | Pilot implementations with limited scope | Data heterogeneity from AC/DC equipment and sensor types | Centralized big data platforms ingesting LN data, advanced AI models | 5G networks, real-time analytics in agent frameworks | High, can drastically improve self-healing efficiency | Overlap with condition monitoring and dynamic control | Joint programs among subway operators, OEMs, AI developers | Government grants, private R&D funding | 3–5 years to robust field deployments |
Integration with Edge and Fog Computing | Conceptual stage in some research labs | Edge computing infra cost, cybersecurity issues, standard APIs | Deploy compact agent hardware, containerized LN-based virtualization | Real-time operating systems, advanced QoS management | Moderate to high, can reduce latency, enhance resilience | IoT-driven station automation, synergy with AI services | Need synergy between computing and utility standardization bodies | Industry–academia partnerships | 3–7 years for large-scale acceptance |
Cybersecurity Frameworks for GOOSE and MMS | Early adoption of stronger encryption or role-based access | Full encryption for GOOSE might hamper performance | GOOSE extension with minimal overhead, role-based access for MASs | Next-gen cryptography frameworks, post-quantum cryptography | Extremely high, especially for vital city infrastructure | Cross-pollination from IT and OT sectors on intrusion detection | Government-level directives, transit agencies, vendors | Dedicated security R&D initiatives, global standard bodies | Ongoing evolution as standards and threats escalate |
Standard Extensions for DC Traction LN | Ongoing expansions to define new LN classes in IEC 61850-7 series | Fragmented LN coverage for DC traction, inconsistent vendor support | Formal LN definitions for DC traction, synergy with existing AC LN | Collaboration among large railway operators, standard committees | High, bridging the gap between AC substation standards and DC-based railway standards | Closer alignment with railway committees and bodies, advanced pilot programs | WG-level involvement from IEC and IRIS-like organizations | Possibly large from major suppliers, government R&D programs | 2–5 years to finalize LN amendments, testing in pilot projects |
Technology | Application Scenario | Degree of Implementation | Differences Between Systems | Future Prospects | Issues to Address | Research Potential | Reliability Impact | Cost Considerations | Maintenance Requirements | Impact on Power Quality |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Fault Detection Algorithms | Detection of electrical faults | Moderate | Varies by system type | High | False positives, sensitivity | High | Significant | Low | Medium | High |
Remote Control and Isolation | Isolation of faulty segments | High | Advanced systems available | Moderate | Communication delays | Moderate | High | Medium | Low | High |
Automated Reconfiguration | System restoration after isolation | High | Varies in implementation | High | Delays in reconfiguration | High | High | High | Low | Medium |
Predictive Maintenance Systems | Fault prediction and maintenance | High | Available in some systems | High | Data accuracy | High | High | Medium | High | High |
Real-Time Monitoring Systems | Continuous system monitoring | Very High | Available in all modern systems | Very High | Requires significant infrastructure | High | Very High | High | High | Very High |
AI-Based Reconfiguration | Dynamic system restoration and reconfiguration | Moderate | New and emerging technology | Very High | Data communication delays | High | Very High | High | Medium | Very High |
Mechanism | Application Scenario | Degree of Implementation | Differences Between Systems | Future Prospects | Issues to Address | Research Potential | Reliability Impact | Cost Considerations | Maintenance Requirements | Impact on Power Quality |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ring Network Reconfiguration | Network reconfiguration after faults | High | Varies by design | High | Risk of power surges | High | High | Medium | Medium | High |
Automated Switches | Fault isolation and rerouting | High | Available in most systems | Moderate | Time delays in operation | Moderate | High | Medium | Low | Medium |
MAS-Based Decision Making | Real-time fault management | Moderate | Innovative for smart grids | High | Data communication overhead | High | Significant | Low | Medium | High |
Fault Detection Sensors | Detecting and locating faults | High | Critical for efficient systems | High | False negatives | Moderate | High | Medium | High | High |
Real-Time Load Balancing | Dynamic balancing of network load | High | Can differ across systems | Very High | Coordination complexity | High | High | High | Low | High |
Adaptive Rerouting | Adjusting power flow dynamically | High | Cutting-edge technology | Very High | Requires high data throughput | High | Very High | High | Medium | Very High |
Mechanism | Application Scenario | Degree of Implementation | Differences Between Systems | Future Prospects | Issues to Address | Research Potential | Reliability Impact | Cost Considerations | Maintenance Requirements | Impact on Power Quality |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hierarchical Recovery | Coordinated fault recovery | High | Varies across systems | Very High | System complexity | High | Very High | High | High | Very High |
Cross-Layer Isolation | Fault isolation across multiple layers | Moderate | New and emerging systems | High | Data consistency | High | High | Medium | High | High |
MASs for Multi-Layer Coordination | Distributed decision making in recovery | High | Requires data consistency | Very High | Communication delays | High | Very High | High | Medium | Very High |
Adaptive Load Balancing | Balancing load across multiple levels | High | Critical for large systems | Very High | Requires real-time data | High | High | High | Low | High |
Data Integration Systems | Integration of data across multiple layers | Moderate | Critical for decision making | High | Data synchronization issues | High | High | High | Medium | Very High |
Predictive Recovery Algorithms | Anticipating faults and recovery actions | Moderate | Experimental in some systems | High | Lack of accurate models | Moderate | High | Low | High | Very High |
Mechanism | Application Scenario | Degree of Implementation | Differences Between Systems | Future Prospects | Issues to Address | Research Potential | Reliability Impact | Cost Considerations | Maintenance Requirements | Impact on Power Quality |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Hierarchical Recovery | Coordinated fault recovery | High | Varies across systems | Very High | System complexity | High | Very High | High | High | Very High |
Cross-Layer Isolation | Fault isolation across multiple layers | Moderate | New and emerging systems | High | Data consistency | High | High | Medium | High | High |
MASs for Multi-Layer Coordination | Distributed decision making in recovery | High | Requires data consistency | Very High | Communication delays | High | Very High | High | Medium | Very High |
Adaptive Load Balancing | Balancing load across multiple levels | High | Critical for large systems | Very High | Requires real-time data | High | High | High | Low | High |
Data Integration Systems | Integration of data across multiple layers | Moderate | Critical for decision making | High | Data synchronization issues | High | High | High | Medium | Very High |
Predictive Recovery Algorithms | Anticipating faults and recovery actions | Moderate | Experimental in some systems | High | Lack of accurate models | Moderate | High | Low | High | Very High |
Application Scenario | Implementation Stage | Distinct Features | Prospects | Challenges | Future Research Potential | Data Requirements | Level of System Impact |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Transformer Monitoring | Emerging | AI-based sensor data fusion | Extended component lifespan | Lack of labeled failure data | Transfer learning for rare faults | High-frequency sensor logs | Medium to high |
Switchgear Fault Detection | Intermediate | Real-time analytics at the edge | Rapid fault isolation | Complexity of multi-vendor systems | Federated learning for distributed sites | Medium-volume event-driven data streams | High |
Cable Insulation Prognostics | Early Adoption | Predictive modeling via ML | Reduced unplanned outages | Environmental variability | Hybrid physics-data-driven approaches | Continuous partial discharge measurements | Medium |
Substation Asset Management | Emerging | Digital twins with AI forecasting | Intelligent maintenance scheduling | Integration with legacy SCADA | Explainable AI for operator trust | Historical maintenance and operation logs | High |
Voltage/Current Anomaly Alerts | Intermediate | DL-based pattern recognition | Near-instant fault recognition | High false-positive risk | Active learning with operator feedback | High-frequency waveform data | Medium to high |
Power Converter Monitoring | Early Adoption | CNN-based image analysis | Improved reliability and efficiency | Model interpretability | Domain adaptation from similar systems | Thermal imagery, high-speed sensor data | Medium |
Passenger Load Prediction (Indirect for Fault Stress) | Experimental | AI correlation with ridership data | Load management optimization | Data privacy concerns | Multi-modal integration (ridership and power) | Access to fare collection and energy data | Low to medium |
Overhead Line Wear Detection | Experimental | Computer vision for wear detection | Enhanced safety and service life | Sensor deployment challenges | UAV and robotics-based inspection | High-resolution imagery and real-time streams | Medium |
Application Scenario | Adoption Level | RL Methodology | Key Advantages | Challenges | Future Research Potential | Distinct Operational Constraints | Long-Term Prospects |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Feeder Reconfiguration | Pilot Studies | Deep Q-Networks | Automated fault isolation | Large state-action space | Transfer learning from simulation | Voltage, current, and safety margins | High, with proven pilot successes |
Load Balancing in Peak Hours | Emerging | Policy Gradient | Dynamic response to changing demand | Maintaining service continuity | Meta-RL for rapid policy updates | Passenger safety, train schedules | High, crucial for growing urban demands |
Multi-Substation Coordination | Experimental | Cooperative RL | Global optimization of resources | Communication overhead among agents | Hierarchical RL for layered coordination | Data exchange and synchronization | Medium to high, depends on standardization |
Integration with MASs | Early Adoption | A2C, PPO | Distributed, scalable intelligence | Complexity of multi-agent negotiations | Hybrid MAS–RL frameworks | Cybersecurity for distributed agents | High, synergy with self-healing goals |
Emergency Fault Recovery | Proof-of-Concept | Model-Based RL | Preemptive planning and quick restore | Ensuring real-time updates of system model | Real-time digital twins and advanced simulation | Strict time constraints | Medium, requires robust real-world data |
Autonomous Voltage Regulation | Conceptual Studies | Off-policy RL | Reduces human oversight | Risk of instability if policy is incorrect | Offline learning with partial environment models | Regulatory compliance and device limitations | Medium, depends on regulatory acceptance |
Signaling-Power Coordination | Emerging | Multi-Agent RL | Holistic approach to operational safety | Complexity of multi-objective optimization | Cross-domain RL frameworks for signal and power data | Interdisciplinary data standards | High, synergy between power and signaling |
Energy Storage Management | Preliminary | Hybrid RL | Minimizes energy costs and improves reliability | Uncertain battery degradation profiles | Transfer and continual learning for battery health | Battery lifetime and cost constraints | Medium, depends on cost-effectiveness |
Integration Dimension | Current Maturity Level | MAS Role | IEC 61850 Feature | AI Contribution | Key Advantages | Major Challenges | Long-Term Potential |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Substation Automation | Intermediate | Agents for local protection schemes | GOOSE for event-driven messaging | Predictive analytics for fault detection | Faster response, standard data modeling | Ensuring backward compatibility, vendor constraints | Very high (foundational for self-healing) |
Energy Routing and Sharing | Emerging | Distributed load management agents | MMS-based data exchange | RL for optimal scheduling | Improved energy efficiency, reduced costs | Coordination complexity | High, particularly for integrated urban networks |
Real-time Fault Recovery | Early Adoption | Negotiation protocols among agents | Sampled values for high-fidelity data | Fast reconfiguration decisions | Autonomous fault isolation and restoration | Handling concurrency and data bursts | High, improves reliability and safety |
Predictive Maintenance | Intermediate | Coordination among asset-level agents | Structured data for sensor readings | ML-based asset health predictions | Reduced downtime, extended equipment life | Integrating with legacy diagnostic systems | Medium to high, reliant on data quality |
Resilience under Cyberattacks | Conceptual Studies | Agents implementing security policies | Role-based access control features | Anomaly detection in network traffic | Enhanced system security and resilience | Evolving threat landscape | Medium, but essential for modern systems |
Integration of Renewables | Pilot | Agents to manage local generation | Enhanced IEC 61850 DER profiles | Multi-objective optimization (AI) | Reduced carbon footprint, diversified energy mix | Uncertainty in renewable supply | Medium to high, synergy with green policies |
Network-wide Optimization | Emerging | Hierarchical MAS architecture | Interoperability across devices | Graph-based AI for global optimization | Holistic approach to load flow and reliability | Scalability of centralized–decentralized hybrids | Very high, potential step-change in performance |
Human–Machine Collaboration | Early Research | Agent-based interactive dashboards | Standardized data for UI integration | Explainable AI for operator guidance | Improved situational awareness and operator trust | Complexity in interface design, training staff | Medium, fosters acceptance of AI decisions |
Focus Area | Risk Level | Primary Threats | Key Security Measures | Privacy Considerations | Data Governance Needs | Implementation Complexity | Future Development Outlook |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Data Poisoning Prevention | High | Altered training datasets | Trusted data pipelines, robust data validation | Minimizing personal data usage | Clear ownership of dataset curation and updates | Medium to high | More advanced anomaly detection |
Intrusion and Ransomware Defense | Very High | Unauthorized system access, encryption of operational data | Multi-factor authentication, network segmentation | Potential exposure of passenger data | Comprehensive role-based permissions | High | Zero-trust architectures, advanced IDS |
Sensor and Edge Device Security | Medium | Spoofing or tampering with local sensors | Secure hardware modules, signed firmware updates | Minimal retention of localized data | Local data lifecycle policies | Medium | Widespread adoption of secure edge computing |
Privacy-Preserving Analytics | High | Inadvertent personal data gathering | Differential privacy, anonymization, secure computation | Regulatory compliance (GDPR, etc.) | Clear guidelines on data usage and sharing | Medium | Adoption of standard privacy frameworks |
Encryption and Secure Protocols | High | Eavesdropping on communication channels | End-to-end encryption, TLS-based solutions | Minimal stored passenger identifiers | IEC 61850 extension with security profiles | Medium | Integration with post-quantum algorithms |
Data Lifecycle Management | Low to Medium | Retention of outdated or unverified data | Automated purging, archiving policies | Proper anonymization before storage | Centralized metadata, consistent versioning | Medium | Growth of advanced data-lake solutions |
Incident Response and Recovery | Very High | Prolonged downtime, compromised assets | Redundant backups, well-defined playbooks, real-time alerts | Data subject notifications if breach occurs | Legislative alignment with local government policies | High | AI-driven automated containment solutions |
Compliance and Certification | Medium | Penalties for non-compliance | Frequent audits, standardized frameworks | Transparent privacy statements | Align with international standards (ISO, IEC) | Medium | Greater emphasis on multi-stakeholder certification |
Dimension | Operational Impact | Economic Influence | Policy Framework | Workforce Implications | Urban Development | Challenges | Long-Term Outlook |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Reliability and Service Quality | Fewer disruptions, faster recovery | Higher ridership, reduced compensation costs | Safety regulations, service standards | Shift toward strategic oversight | Public trust in mass transit | Ensuring AI reliability and acceptance | High, fosters public adoption of subways |
Cost Structure and Funding | Reduced O&M expenses, capital reallocation | Potential new revenue streams (data monetization) | PPP frameworks, capital incentives | Demand for financial data analysts | Reinforcement of transit networks | Cost of AI integration | Medium to high, dependent on ROI |
Workforce Transition | Automated routine tasks, improved safety | Indirect cost savings from fewer human errors | Labor guidelines, reskilling grants | Need for data science and AI specialists | Enhanced system stability | Resistance to change, union negotiations | Medium, requires policy and education synergy |
Environmental Sustainability | Energy optimization, synergy with renewables | Lower carbon footprint, positive brand image | Green certifications, carbon credits | Additional roles for sustainability officers | Integration with EV infrastructure | Gaps in grid readiness, technology unproven in some areas | High, part of broader city climate goals |
Innovation and Technology Ecosystem | Faster deployment of advanced solutions | Stimulates local tech sectors, fosters start-ups | IP regulations, open data policies | Collaborative R&D roles across universities and operators | Enhanced city-wide innovation | Balancing proprietary and open-source solutions | High, strong synergy with digital economy |
Urban Resilience | Quick adaptation to unexpected events | Reduces economic losses from major incidents | Disaster preparedness rules, city planning | Cross-functional roles in risk management | Encourages stronger public transport usage | Complexity of integrating multiple infrastructures | High, critical for disaster mitigation |
Regulatory Alignment | Compliance with safety/operational mandates | Avoids penalties, fosters public–private partnerships | Evolving standards for AI and data usage | Higher accountability for operators | Possible expansion of rail services | Complexity of multi-layer governance | Medium, depends on legislative agility |
Public Trust and Acceptance | Transparent, real-time communication | Potential for fare policy changes, better ridership | Privacy protection, public engagement | Emphasis on communication skills in staff training | Improved passenger satisfaction | Data privacy concerns, potential for misunderstandings | High, essential for widespread adoption |
Security Threat | Potential Impact | Mitigation Strategy | Implementation Complexity | Priority Level |
---|---|---|---|---|
Data Poisoning | Degraded AI model performance and incorrect decisions | Secure data pipelines, anomaly detection, and data validation | High | Very High |
Sensor Spoofing | Misleading data leading to incorrect fault isolation | Encryption of sensor data, anomaly detection, sensor authentication | Medium | High |
Ransomware and DoS Attacks | Disruption of system functionality and operational downtime | Regular backups, intrusion detection systems, secure communication | High | Very High |
Unauthorized Access | Compromised system control and decision-making | Multi-factor authentication, access control policies, secure protocols | High | Very High |
Communication Latency | Delayed fault detection and recovery | Edge computing, low-latency communication protocols | Medium | High |
Spoofing of AI Decisions | Inaccurate decisions leading to system instability | Secure AI pipelines, explainable AI, anomaly detection | High | Medium |
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. |
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Feng, J.; Yu, T.; Zhang, K.; Cheng, L. Integration of Multi-Agent Systems and Artificial Intelligence in Self-Healing Subway Power Supply Systems: Advancements in Fault Diagnosis, Isolation, and Recovery. Processes 2025, 13, 1144. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13041144
Feng J, Yu T, Zhang K, Cheng L. Integration of Multi-Agent Systems and Artificial Intelligence in Self-Healing Subway Power Supply Systems: Advancements in Fault Diagnosis, Isolation, and Recovery. Processes. 2025; 13(4):1144. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13041144
Chicago/Turabian StyleFeng, Jianbing, Tao Yu, Kuozhen Zhang, and Lefeng Cheng. 2025. "Integration of Multi-Agent Systems and Artificial Intelligence in Self-Healing Subway Power Supply Systems: Advancements in Fault Diagnosis, Isolation, and Recovery" Processes 13, no. 4: 1144. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13041144
APA StyleFeng, J., Yu, T., Zhang, K., & Cheng, L. (2025). Integration of Multi-Agent Systems and Artificial Intelligence in Self-Healing Subway Power Supply Systems: Advancements in Fault Diagnosis, Isolation, and Recovery. Processes, 13(4), 1144. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13041144