Fault Diagnosis in Power Grids with Large Language Model

Large Language Models (LLMs) have seen substantial advancements and wide-ranging applications in recent years [4, 5]. The comprehensive review by [6] details the architectural innovations and training strategies that have propelled LLMs to the forefront of AI research. Additionally, [7, 8] and [9, 10] provide extensive surveys highlighting the significant impact of LLMs on the AI community, particularly with the advent of models like ChatGPT and GPT-4. These surveys discuss how LLMs serve as general-purpose language task solvers and their potential role in achieving artificial general intelligence (AGI).

Innovations such as Low-Rank Adaptation (LoRA) of LLMs, as explored by [11], focus on enhancing the efficiency and adaptability of these models for specific tasks. Furthermore, research into the cross-lingual capabilities of LLMs, such as the studies conducted by [12, 13], highlights the models’ potential to generalize across different languages. The concept of integrating LLMs with traditional planning systems for robotics, as discussed by [14], showcases the versatility of LLMs in complex task planning and execution. Lastly, the role of LLMs in theorem proving and scientific research, as presented by [15] and [16], underscores their utility in specialized, high-cognitive domains.

The diagnosis of faults in power grids is critical for maintaining the reliability and stability of electrical systems. Traditional methods have been significantly enhanced through the integration of AI and machine learning techniques. The review by [17, 18] provides a comprehensive overview of AI-based methods for diagnosing open-circuit faults in power electronics converters, emphasizing their importance in modern power systems.

Recent advancements in smart grid fault detection are discussed by [19], highlighting the need for low-latency, high-accuracy detection methods using cloud-edge collaborative systems. The use of graph neural networks (GNNs) for fault event diagnosis in smart grids, as explored by [20], demonstrates the effectiveness of GNN-based approaches in handling complex, multi-task scenarios. Furthermore, the integration of machine learning methods for distributed energy resource inverters, as presented by [21], showcases the potential of these techniques to maintain normal operations during faults.

A variety of machine learning models, including convolutional neural networks (CNNs) and random forests, have been employed for real-time fault localization and diagnosis. For instance, [22] proposes a method for real-time localization of faulted lines using CNNs, while [23] employs random forests for diagnosing faults in three-phase PWM rectifiers. The application of digital twins and Bayesian approaches for optimizing fault diagnosis in grid-connected inverters, as discussed by [24], further illustrates the integration of advanced computational methods in power systems.

Traditional evaluation metrics such as precision, recall, and F1-score are often insufficient to capture the nuanced performance of LLMs in complex diagnostic tasks. Therefore, we developed a set of novel evaluation metrics that leverage GPT-4’s advanced capabilities to judge the quality of fault diagnosis.

The primary evaluation metrics used in our study are as follows:

Diagnostic Accuracy: This metric measures the correctness of the fault diagnosis provided by the LLMs. However, instead of a simple binary correctness measure, we employ a graded accuracy score where partial correctness (e.g., identifying the correct fault type but not the exact component) receives a proportional score.

Explainability Quality: Explainability is critical for trust and usability in fault diagnosis systems. GPT-4 evaluates the quality of the explanations generated by the LLMs based on clarity, completeness, and relevance. This includes assessing how well the LLMs justify their diagnoses and how understandable their explanations are to human operators.

Response Coherence: This metric evaluates the coherence and consistency of the LLMs’ responses over a series of related queries. It is essential that the LLMs maintain logical consistency and provide coherent narratives, especially when follow-up questions are asked based on previous responses.

Contextual Understanding: Given the complexity of power grid systems, it is crucial that LLMs understand and utilize context effectively. GPT-4 judges how well the LLMs incorporate contextual information from the dataset into their diagnostic processes and responses.

By using GPT-4 as an advanced judge for these metrics, we aim to obtain a more comprehensive and nuanced evaluation of the LLMs’ performance in power grid fault diagnosis tasks. These metrics ensure that the models are not only accurate but also reliable and understandable, which are essential qualities for practical deployment in real-world scenarios.

• •

  Diagnostic Accuracy with graded scoring to account for partial correctness.

• •

  Explainability Quality assessed by clarity, completeness, and relevance of explanations.

• •

  Response Coherence to ensure logical consistency and narrative flow in responses.

• •

  Contextual Understanding to measure effective use of contextual information.

The motivation behind our method is to leverage the capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs) to enhance the accuracy and explainability of power grid fault diagnosis. Traditional diagnostic systems often struggle with the complexity and variability of power grid data. By employing LLMs, specifically through carefully designed prompts, we aim to harness their ability to process and interpret large volumes of data, generate insightful explanations, and interact with human operators in a meaningful way. This approach seeks to bridge the gap between automated diagnostics and human understanding, ensuring that fault diagnoses are not only accurate but also comprehensible and actionable.

Our method revolves around the use of specifically engineered prompts that guide the LLMs to perform fault diagnosis effectively. The prompts are designed to be comprehensive, context-aware, and interactive, ensuring that the LLMs can gather, process, and interpret the necessary information accurately.

Prompt Input: The input to our prompts includes real-time sensor data, historical fault records, and detailed descriptions of power grid components. This data is structured to provide the LLMs with a complete picture of the operational state and historical context of the power grid. An example input prompt might be:

"Given the following sensor readings: Voltage at Transformer
T1 is 110V, Current at Circuit Breaker CB1 is 15A, and Temperature
at Transmission Line TL2 is 75C. Historical fault records indicate
a frequent overheating issue at TL2. Describe the current operational
state and identify any potential faults. Explain your reasoning."

Prompt Output: The expected output from the LLMs includes a detailed diagnosis of the current state, identification of any faults, and a clear explanation of the reasoning behind the diagnosis. An example output might be:

"The current sensor readings indicate that the Voltage at Transformer
T1 and the Current at Circuit Breaker CB1 are within normal operational
ranges. However, the Temperature at Transmission Line TL2 is higher
than the typical threshold, suggesting a potential overheating issue.
Given the historical fault records, it is likely that TL2 is
experiencing a recurrent overheating problem. Recommended actions
include inspecting the cooling systems and ensuring proper load
distribution across the transmission lines."

The significance of this method lies in its ability to enhance the diagnostic capabilities of power grid systems through the use of LLMs combined with prompt engineering. By carefully crafting prompts, we ensure that the LLMs can interpret complex data accurately and provide detailed, understandable explanations. This approach offers several advantages:

• •

  Improved Accuracy: The structured prompts guide the LLMs to focus on relevant data, improving the accuracy of fault diagnoses.

• •

  Enhanced Explainability: Detailed explanations generated by the LLMs help operators understand the reasoning behind diagnoses, fostering trust and facilitating better decision-making.

• •

  Interactive Diagnostics: The ability to interact with LLMs through prompts allows operators to query further details and receive tailored insights, making the diagnostic process more dynamic and responsive.

In summary, our method of using prompt engineering with LLMs for power grid fault diagnosis represents a significant step forward in making these systems more accurate, explainable, and user-friendly.

Our experimental setup involved constructing a new dataset specifically for this study. This dataset includes real-time sensor data, historical fault records, and detailed descriptions of power grid components. The real-time sensor data was collected from a variety of sources within the power grid, capturing key operational parameters such as voltage, current, temperature, and vibration at high frequencies to ensure that transient events and anomalies were accurately recorded.

The historical fault records consist of detailed logs of past fault events, including their causes, the components affected, and the corrective actions taken. These records provide essential context and patterns that are critical for training and evaluating the LLMs. Additionally, we included detailed descriptions of the power grid components and their configurations to help the LLMs understand the physical and functional relationships within the system.

The baseline methods used for comparison in our experiments include:

• •

  Standard Prompting: Basic prompts without any specific engineering to guide the model’s responses.

• •

  Chain-of-Thought (CoT): A method where the model is prompted to explain its reasoning process step-by-step.

• •

  Tree-of-Thought (ToT): An approach where the model is prompted to explore multiple possible reasoning paths before arriving at a conclusion.

The performance of each method was evaluated using the following metrics:

• •

  Diagnostic Accuracy: Measures the correctness of the fault diagnosis, using a graded accuracy score for partial correctness.

• •
• •

  Explainability Quality: Assessed by the clarity, completeness, and relevance of the explanations generated by the LLMs.

• •

  Response Coherence: Evaluates the coherence and consistency of the LLMs’ responses over a series of related queries.

• •

  Contextual Understanding: Judges how well the LLMs incorporate and utilize contextual information from the dataset.

The results of our experiments are summarized in Table 1, which shows the performance of each method on both ChatGPT and GPT-4 models.

The experimental results demonstrate that our prompt engineering method significantly outperforms the baseline methods across all evaluated metrics. Specifically, the Diagnostic Accuracy and Explainability Quality show substantial improvements, indicating that our prompts help the models generate more accurate and understandable diagnoses.

For instance, GPT-4 with our method achieved a diagnostic accuracy of 0.92 compared to 0.87 with ToT and 0.84 with CoT. The explainability quality also improved, reaching 0.90 with our method, whereas ToT and CoT achieved 0.83 and 0.80, respectively. These results highlight the importance of carefully designed prompts in guiding the LLMs to process and interpret complex power grid data effectively.

Furthermore, the improvements in Response Coherence and Contextual Understanding demonstrate that our method enhances the models’ ability to maintain logical consistency and utilize context effectively. This is crucial for practical deployment, as it ensures that the diagnostic process is both reliable and comprehensible to human operators.

To further validate the effectiveness of our method, we conducted additional analyses involving different fault scenarios and stress-testing the models with complex, multi-fault cases. These scenarios were designed to push the limits of the LLMs’ diagnostic capabilities and assess their robustness in handling intricate and less common fault conditions.

The results from these additional tests confirmed the robustness and reliability of our method. Even under challenging conditions, our prompt-engineered approach consistently provided accurate diagnoses and coherent, detailed explanations, reinforcing its potential for real-world applications in power grid fault diagnosis.

In conclusion, our prompt engineering method not only enhances the diagnostic capabilities of LLMs but also ensures that the generated insights are explainable and actionable, making it a valuable tool for power grid fault diagnosis.