Skip to content
AI News HubLIVE
Original source2 min read

Data-Optimized Contingency Screening: A Machine Learning Approach to Power System Security

Summary

This paper investigates machine learning classifiers for power system contingency security, categorizing scenarios as safe, moderate, or severe. Using Newton-Raphson load flow and the Overall Performance Index, the authors applied SMOTE and PCA preprocessing, then evaluated KNN, Random Forest, and SVM on N-k contingencies for IEEE-14 and IEEE-30 bus systems. Random Forest achieved the best F1 scores (0.97 IEEE-30, 0.86 IEEE-14), with PCA contributing more to performance than SMOTE. The study suggests ML offers scalable real-time security assessment.

SourcearXiv AIAuthor: Joshua Salako, Folajimi Osikomaiya, Olakorede Olamiju
Data-Optimized Contingency Screening: A Machine Learning Approach to Power System Security
Report an error

The correction channel is not available yet. You can copy the article reference below for later.

Correction instructions
Read article

[Submitted on 3 Sep 2026]

Title:Data-Optimized Contingency Screening: A Machine Learning Approach to Power System Security

View a PDF of the paper titled Data-Optimized Contingency Screening: A Machine Learning Approach to Power System Security, by Joshua Salako and 2 other authors

View PDF

Abstract:Ensuring the security of the power system is essential for stability and reliability, especially in the event of disruption. Effective classification of contingency in power systems enables proactive decision-making and mitigates large-scale breakdowns and failures. This study explores the use of machine learning algorithms to classify security levels of contingencies in power systems into safe, moderate or severe classes. For this approach, Newton-Raphson load flow method extracts system data from contingency scenarios, using Overall Performance Index (OPI) as safety measure. For data pre-processing, Synthetic Minority Over-Sampling Technique (SMOTE) and Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is used to address class imbalance and reduce dimensionality, respectively. K-Nearest Neighbours (KNN), Random Forest (RF) and Support Vector Machines (SVM) is trained and evaluated on datasets generated through N-k contingency scenarios for k equal 1, 2, and 3 on IEEE-14 and IEEE-30 bus systems using four hybrid pre-processing configurations: normalized, SMOTE-balanced, PCA-transformed, and a combined SMOTE PCA-transformed. Performance is assessed by precision, recall and F1 score, with priority given to the severe contingency classes. The RF achieved the highest F1 scores of 0.97 in IEEE-30 and 0.86 in IEEE-14, SVM benefits significantly from PCA and improves the accuracy of the classification, while KNN is best suited for SMOTE and PCA conversion. The findings show that PCA contributes more than SMOTE to the overall performance of the model. However, SMOTE improves recall but can introduce false positives and is therefore a compromise of accuracy. This study highlights machine learning as a scalable and powerful alternative to traditional contingency analysis, which improves the assessment of security in real time.

Comments: Accepted for presentation at the 3rd EIE International Conference on Computing, Networking, Robotics and Telecommunication (EIECon), 2025. To appear in IEEE Xplore

Subjects:

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Machine Learning (cs.LG)

Cite as: arXiv:2609.04300 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2609.04300v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2609.04300

arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite

Submission history

From: Joshua Salako [view email] [v1] Thu, 3 Sep 2026 17:04:38 UTC (1,213 KB)

Full-text links:

Access Paper:

View a PDF of the paper titled Data-Optimized Contingency Screening: A Machine Learning Approach to Power System Security, by Joshua Salako and 2 other authors

View PDF

view license

Current browse context:

cs.AI

new | recent | 2026-09

Change to browse by:

cs cs.LG

References & Citations

NASA ADS

Google Scholar

Semantic Scholar

Loading...

Data provided by:

Bibliographic Tools

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Bibliographic Explorer Toggle

Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)

Connected Papers Toggle

Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)

Litmaps Toggle

Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)

scite.ai Toggle

scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)

Code, Data, Media

Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article

alphaXiv Toggle

alphaXiv (What is alphaXiv?)

Links to Code Toggle

CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)

DagsHub Toggle

DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)

GotitPub Toggle

Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)

Huggingface Toggle

Hugging Face (What is Huggingface?)

ScienceCast Toggle

ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)

Demos

Demos

Replicate Toggle

Replicate (What is Replicate?)

Spaces Toggle

Hugging Face Spaces (What is Spaces?)

Spaces Toggle

TXYZ.AI (What is TXYZ.AI?)

Related Papers

Recommenders and Search Tools

Link to Influence Flower

Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)

Core recommender toggle

CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)

Author

Venue

Institution

Topic

About arXivLabs

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)

Key points and analysis

Article intelligence

EngineersAdvanced

Key points

  • Machine learning models classify power system contingencies into safe, moderate, or severe using the Overall Performance Index.
  • SMOTE and PCA address class imbalance and high dimensionality in N-k contingency datasets.
  • Random Forest achieved top F1 scores of 0.97 (IEEE-30) and 0.86 (IEEE-14).
  • PCA provided greater performance gains than SMOTE; SMOTE improved recall but at the cost of false positives.

Highlights and analysis are generated automatically and may contain errors. Check the original source.