Voltage Magnitude Correction Strategy

• Voltage Magnitude Correction Strategy is a set of techniques that use optimization, control theory, and data-driven estimation to maintain voltage levels within strict tolerances.
• It integrates methods such as feedback/feedforward correction, calibration-based adjustments, and distributed algorithms to adapt to disturbances and parameter drifts in real time.
• Applications span power grid management, battery systems, and sensor calibration, achieving significant error reduction and enhanced system reliability.

A voltage magnitude correction strategy comprises algorithmic, circuit-level, or software procedures designed to correct, calibrate, or maintain the voltage magnitude at a desired reference or within stringent bounds, in the presence of disturbances, model uncertainties, hardware non-idealities, or environmental changes. These strategies span power grid operation, battery management, reference-generation circuits, and sensor calibration, using methods ranging from optimization and control theory to physics-informed circuit design and data-driven estimation.

1. Principles of Voltage Magnitude Correction

The core objective of any voltage magnitude correction strategy is the real-time or near-real-time adjustment of a system’s control settings to enforce voltage magnitude at targeted nodes (buses, terminals, or circuit nodes) within specified tolerances, despite exogenous variability or parameter drift.

Correction mechanisms can be broadly classified as follows:

• Feedback and Feedforward Correction: Uses real-time voltage measurements and model-derived or data-driven sensitivity matrices to compute required control injections or setpoint changes that drive voltages to desired values (Xu et al., 2017, Cheng et al., 2022).
• Calibration-Based Correction: Directly calibrates sensor or transducer stages to nullify scale errors or drift (e.g., active pilot injection for line-mounted capacitive voltage measurement) (Sevlian et al., 2017).
• Parameter Estimation and Compensation: Estimates uncertain or drifting system parameters (e.g., line impedance, sensor capacitance, Thevenin equivalents) online, then corrects measured voltages using updated parameters (Liu et al., 14 Dec 2025).
• Optimization-Based Correction: Formulates correction as a convex (or sometimes nonconvex) program, typically minimizing voltage deviations or maximizing distance to collapse, subject to operational constraints (Xu et al., 2017, Todescato et al., 2016, Cheng et al., 2022).
• Distributed and Decentralized Strategies: Implements correction in a multi-agent or layered scheme, often sharing minimal local data and relying on consensus, coordination, or plug-and-play operation (Long et al., 2021, Liu et al., 14 Dec 2025, Chen et al., 2021).

2. Algorithmic and Control-Theoretic Methods

Centralized Quadratic/Conic Programming

In distribution and transmission networks, voltage magnitude correction is typically cast as the solution to a convex program that minimizes the deviation of bus voltage magnitudes from target values, often subject to hard limits on controllable resources, power flows, and network constraints. A prototypical approach is the data-driven LinDistFlow quadratic program:

$$\min_{p^g, q^g} \|u - u^*\|_2^2 + \lambda\mathbb{1}^T(p^g + q^g) + \gamma \|[\underline u - u]_+\|_1 + \gamma\|[u-\overline u]_+\|_1$$

subject to network power-flow and resource constraints (Xu et al., 2017). The correction is implemented by computing optimal setpoints for DERs or other actuators, which are dispatched at each control interval.

Newton-Type and Projected Gradient Methods

For voltage magnitude correction over unbalanced, multi-phase feeder networks, projected Newton methods exploit the quadratic structure of squared-voltage deviation cost and the SPD Hessian to scale gradient steps and accelerate convergence under box constraints:

$$x_{k+1} = \Pi_{\mathcal{X}} \left( x_k - \alpha_k D_k^{-1} \nabla h(x_k) \right)$$

where $D_k$ is a Hessian-based scaling (possibly modified by active-set heuristics), and $\mathcal{X}$ encodes DER reactive bounds (Cheng et al., 2022).

Model-Free and Distributed Optimization

Model-free continuous-time projected primal-dual gradient flows augmented with zeroth-order extremum seeking allow for decentralized, plug-and-play optimal voltage correction, requiring only voltage measurements (no network model):

• Agents inject small perturbations (sinusoidal dithers), estimate local voltage sensitivities in real-time, and update control and dual variables via projected flows.
• Voltage constraints are enforced continuously, and structural robustness to measurement noise is achieved (Chen et al., 2021).

Distributed Reinforcement Learning and Sensitivity Correction

Coordinated distributed RL voltage control leverages local Thevenin equivalent estimation (via consecutive voltage/current phasor samples), followed by a two-tier correction: (1) data-fitted piecewise polynomial "clamping" of raw estimates, and (2) transformer-encoder neural network refinement that maps historical context and physical parameters to a final corrected node voltage. A simple scaling/coordination mechanism (capacity-scaler $\beta$ and neighbor quadratic programming) is used to avoid local agents' over-compensation and keep all voltages within safe limits (Liu et al., 14 Dec 2025).

3. Physical and Circuit-Level Correction

Active Calibration in Voltage Transducers

Actively calibrated line-mountable capacitive voltage transducers (LMCVT) use a known pilot signal $v_P(t)$ injected at an out-of-band frequency. Measurement frames are split into two parallel estimation channels:

1. $\widehat{C}_p$ estimation from the pilot response via:

$$\widehat C_p = \frac{C_s}{V_P} \frac{1}{K} \sum_{k=1}^K \beta[k]$$

where $\beta[k]$ is extracted via band-pass filtering.

2. Voltage correction computes the corrected voltage as:

$$\widehat V_L[k] = \frac{C_s}{\widehat C_p} \alpha[k]$$

with $\alpha[k]$ being the main-frequency (e.g. 60 Hz) amplitude.

This approach eliminates error due to unknown or drifting sensor capacitance as well as suppressing error from stray capacitances, reducing measurement error by up to 90% compared to prior passive calibration methods (Sevlian et al., 2017).

Reference Circuits: Separate Line Sensitivity and TC Correction

Ultra-low-power subthreshold voltage reference circuits for IoT and sensor applications split voltage magnitude correction into two stages:

• Stage 1 ("LS Corrector"): Reduces supply sensitivity (Line Sensitivity, LS) through DIBL-compensated one-active-load topology.
• Stage 2 ("TC Corrector"): Nullifies temperature coefficient (TC) through PTAT/CTAT balancing and dimension ratio tuning.

Key architectural feature: resulting LS is multiplicative, $LS_{total} \approx LS_1 \cdot LS_2$; tuning allows $\ll0.02\%$/V LS and $\sim7$ ppm/K TC at pW power levels (Azimi et al., 2021).

4. Data-Driven and Adaptive Techniques

Real-Time Sensitivity and Model Adaptation

A critical feature across modern correction strategies is adaptive estimation of network parameters (e.g., resistances, reactances), as these drift due to tap-changing, aging, or unknown topology. Online regression using a sliding window of phasor measurements enables rapid recovery of sensitivity matrices in the LinDistFlow model (Xu et al., 2017). The low data-complexity (often $m\approx L$ samples suffice for an $L$-line network) and the ability to update upon every new measurement provide robust tracking of parameter changes.

Consensus, Coalition, and Leader-Follower Schemes

In high DER penetration scenarios, dynamically formed inverter coalitions use distributed consensus algorithms (with explicit time-varying communication networks) to share regulation burden, partition into over- and under-voltage subgroups, and re-merge as local voltages return to bounds. Leader-follower average consensus in each coalition ensures voltage correction is shared proportional to inverter capacities, with convergence proven under strong convexity and appropriate communication assumptions (Long et al., 2021).

5. Stress, Robustness, and Optimality Metrics

Stress Minimization and System Security

Some correction strategies maximize system security margin by minimizing the "stress" metric,

$J_{stress}(v) = \|v-1\|_\infty,$

where $v$ is the normalized voltage vector, via optimal placement and dispatch of reactive power. Linearization around open-circuit and nominal points produces a tractable LP formulation,

$\min_{q} \|Q_{crit}^{-1}(Q_L+q)\|_\infty$

with controller sparsity enforced by weighted $\ell_1$ penalties. Constrained dual ascent schemes provide a distributed, scalable online implementation (Todescato et al., 2016).

Calibration and Correction in Adverse Conditions

In battery management, voltage-based correction strategies correct for sensor attacks or systematic drift by applying staged error compensation: an online (Koopman-based) bias correction using the difference between predicted and measured voltage, and a physics- or data-driven residual compensation leveraging the OCV–SOC mapping or machine learning (e.g., Gaussian Process Regression). These provide resilience to bias/Fault-Data-Injection and Denial-of-Service attacks, with residual RMSE reduced to sub-5 mV (Ghosh et al., 14 Apr 2025).

Laboratory and Field Evaluation

Empirical validations typically report:

• Error reduction metrics: ≤1% mean error, one order-of-magnitude reduction in standard deviation compared to prior art in LMCVT (Sevlian et al., 2017).
• Constraint enforcement: All bus voltages within ANSI bounds for all periods, as opposed to frequent violations without correction (Dhulipala et al., 2019).
• Computational scalability: O(N) to O(N³) per solve in network size, with online adaptation feasible at sub-minute intervals for large feeders (Xu et al., 2017, Cheng et al., 2022).

6. Key Application Domains

Power System Operation

Strategies are applied at both transmission (e.g., Eigen/Singular Value Decomposition of FDLF Jacobian for generator-voltage tuning (Banadaki et al., 2017, Iqbal et al., 2018)) and distribution levels (centralized and distributed Volt/VAR control, reinforcement learning, coalition control).

Instrumentation and Low-Power Circuits

Active calibration and cascaded correction for voltage references in electronics, especially voltage and temperature insensitivity in subthreshold CMOS circuits (Azimi et al., 2021).

Energy Storage and Battery Management

Charge-end voltage correction for SOC estimation in battery packs—using data-driven voltage thresholds and blending the correction with baseline estimators for smooth, safe convergence to 100% SOC (Abdollahi et al., 2022). Secure voltage estimation under adversarial sensor attacks via self-learning and hybrid residual compensation (Ghosh et al., 14 Apr 2025).

Virtual Synchronous Generator Control

Advanced correction for VSGs employs complex-coefficient controllers, explicit pole placement, and transient compensation (angle-voltage decoupling), with direct analytic tuning and hardware-validated elimination of harmful oscillatory modes (Xu et al., 5 Jul 2024).

7. Implementation Guidance and Comparative Features

Table: Selected Correction Strategies and Core Techniques

Domain	Method/Principle	Reference
Grid Operation	Data-driven QP on LinDistFlow	(Xu et al., 2017)
Power System	SVD/EVD of FDLF Jacobian	(Banadaki et al., 2017, Iqbal et al., 2018)
IoT Circuits	Two-stage LS/TC cascade	(Azimi et al., 2021)
Instrumentation	Active calibration, pilot injection	(Sevlian et al., 2017)
Batteries	Charge-end voltage-based SOC	(Abdollahi et al., 2022)
Grid RL	Thevenin + ANN + QP coordination	(Liu et al., 14 Dec 2025)
Model-Free	Primal-dual + extremum-seeking	(Chen et al., 2021)
VSG/VSI	Pole-placed, complex-coefficient	(Xu et al., 5 Jul 2024)

Implementation requires matching algorithmic and communication complexity to system characteristic timescales and resource constraints. Strategies that directly leverage measurement feedback (projected Newton, primal-dual gradient with dithered estimation, consensus-based coalition) exhibit high adaptivity to fast disturbances but require careful handling of actuator bounds, communication latency, and measurement noise. For field-sensor correction, on-board or hybrid (cloud/local) active calibration and multi-stage error compensation are necessary for robust, long-term absolute accuracy.

---

• Actively Calibrated Line Mountable Capacitive Voltage Transducer For Power Systems Applications (Sevlian et al., 2017)
• A Data-driven Voltage Control Framework for Power Distribution Systems (Xu et al., 2017)
• A 0.4 V, 19 pW Subthreshold Voltage Reference Generator Using Separate Line Sensitivity and Temperature Coefficient Correction Stages (Azimi et al., 2021)
• Voltage-Based State of Charge Correction at Charge-End (Abdollahi et al., 2022)
• Distributed Reinforcement Learning using Local Smart Meter Data for Voltage Regulation in Distribution Networks (Liu et al., 14 Dec 2025)
• Voltage Control Using Eigen Value Decomposition of Fast Decoupled Load Flow Jacobian (Banadaki et al., 2017)
• Control Strategy Design for Power Quality Management in Active Distribution Networks (Dhulipala et al., 2019)
• A Complex-Coefficient Voltage Control for Virtual Synchronous Generators for Dynamic Enhancement and Power-Voltage Decoupling (Xu et al., 5 Jul 2024)
• Secure Estimation of Battery Voltage Under Sensor Attacks: A Self-Learning Koopman Approach (Ghosh et al., 14 Apr 2025)
• Voltage stress minimization by optimal reactive power control (Todescato et al., 2016)
• Online Voltage Control for Unbalanced Distribution Networks Using Projected Newton Method (Cheng et al., 2022)
• Model-Free Optimal Voltage Control via Continuous-Time Zeroth-Order Methods (Chen et al., 2021)
• Optimal voltage control using singular value decomposition of fast decoupled load flow jacobian (Iqbal et al., 2018)
• Adaptive Coalition Formation-Based Coordinated Voltage Regulation in Distribution Networks (Long et al., 2021)
• Using Voltage Phasor Control to Avoid Distribution Network Constraint Violations (Moffat et al., 2022)