inZORi PF-Δ · Phase 5

ENTSO-E Real Load Validation: Romania, Germany, France (2024)

inZORi Multi-Genome Frozen Elite vs NR Standard · Real European Consumption Data · IEEE 118-bus
Author: Novic Dumitru · February 2026 · 48 jobs · 3 countries · 4 variants · 4 seeds · 1,920,000 steps total

Abstract

Phase 5 provides the first validation of the inZORi Multi-Genome Frozen Elite algorithm using live European grid consumption data sourced directly from the ENTSO-E Transparency Platform API (2024). Three structurally distinct grids are tested: Romania (thermal/hydro mix), Germany (renewables-heavy), and France (nuclear-dominant). Under identical stressed conditions (N-1/N-2/N-4 contingencies, NR_MAX=3 iterations), the inZORi FrozenElite algorithm achieves 75–92% S3 convergence versus 4.5–15% for NR standard — a 6× to 17× improvement on real 2024 European consumption data.

91.7%
FrozenElite S3 conv.
France (ENTSO-E 2024)
4.5%
NR Standard S3 conv.
Romania (ENTSO-E 2024)
×16.7
Multiplicative advantage
FrozenElite vs NR (RO)
+70.8pp
Absolute advantage
FrozenElite vs NR (RO)
3
Countries tested
RO · DE · FR
8,760
Real hourly data points
per country (full year 2024)

1. Data Sources — Real ENTSO-E 2024

All load profiles are sourced directly from the ENTSO-E Transparency Platform API (document type A74, actual total load), covering the full calendar year 2024 (8,760 hourly values per country). No synthetic generation, no interpolation of historical averages.

CountryGrid TypeENTSO-E ZoneYearData PointsLoad Range Applied
Romania (RO) Thermal / Hydro mix 10YRO-TEL------P 2024 8,760 h [1.575×, 1.925×] nominal
Germany (DE) Renewables-heavy (wind/solar) 10Y1001A1001A82H 2024 8,760 h [1.575×, 1.925×] nominal
France (FR) Nuclear-dominant (≈70%) 10YFR-RTE------C 2024 8,760 h [1.575×, 1.925×] nominal

Raw ENTSO-E profiles are normalized to [0,1] then scaled to [1.575×, 1.925×] nominal IEEE 118-bus load, placing the network near voltage collapse boundary where warm-start advantage is maximal.

2. Methodology

Simulation Setup

Variants Compared

LabelAlgorithmLoad ProfileDescription
A inZORi FrozenElite N-4 ENTSO-E Real Adaptive selector, 12 frozen genomes (N-1/N-2/N-4 specialists) + real profile
B G01 Static (best single genome) ENTSO-E Real Top-ranked genome only, no selection logic + real profile
C NR Standard (flat-start) ENTSO-E Real Newton-Raphson with flat initialization (industry baseline) + real profile
D inZORi FrozenElite N-4 Synthetic Same FrozenElite on synthetic ShockGenerator (control: real vs synthetic)

3. Results

S3 Convergence by Country and Variant
Fig 1 — S3 Power Flow Convergence Rate (%) for four variants across three countries. Error bars = CI95 over 4 seeds. NR Standard (red) collapses under real ENTSO-E stress.

Detailed Results Table

CountryVariantS3 Conv%Mean Iter.N1 Rec.N2 Rec.N4 Rec.Source
Romania A FrozenElite+Real 75.3%1.925.29.114.3 ENTSO-E RO 2024
B G01static+Real 75.8%1.945.49.314.6 ENTSO-E RO 2024
C NR+Real 4.5%2.9827.631.129.3 ENTSO-E RO 2024
D FrozenElite+Synthetic 51.2%1.885.18.913.8 Synthetic
Germany A FrozenElite+Real 82.5%1.894.98.613.7 ENTSO-E DE 2024
B G01static+Real 82.8%1.915.08.814.0 ENTSO-E DE 2024
C NR+Real 11.4%2.9725.129.428.2 ENTSO-E DE 2024
D FrozenElite+Synthetic 51.3%1.874.98.713.6 Synthetic
France A FrozenElite+Real 91.7%1.864.58.112.9 ENTSO-E FR 2024
B G01static+Real 92.2%1.884.78.313.2 ENTSO-E FR 2024
C NR+Real 15.1%2.9723.827.626.5 ENTSO-E FR 2024
D FrozenElite+Synthetic 51.4%1.874.68.213.1 Synthetic
FrozenElite Advantage over NR
Fig 2 — Left: Absolute advantage (percentage points) of FrozenElite over NR Standard. Right: Multiplicative factor — FrozenElite converges 6× to 17× more often than NR on real ENTSO-E data.
Recovery Times N-1/N-2/N-4
Fig 3 — Average recovery steps after N-1, N-2, and N-4 contingency events. FrozenElite and G01 recover in 4–15 steps; NR Standard requires 24–31 steps (when it converges at all).
Research Progression Phase 1 to 5
Fig 4 — inZORi research progression from Phase 1 (synthetic) to Phase 5 (real ENTSO-E). The advantage gap widens as test conditions become more realistic.

4. Key Findings

Finding 1 — NR Standard fails catastrophically on real ENTSO-E data

With NR_MAX=3 iterations (operationally realistic for real-time grid management), NR Standard converges in only 4.5% (RO), 11.4% (DE), and 15.1% (FR) of stressed S3 steps. This represents a near-total failure of the baseline method under realistic European consumption patterns.

Finding 2 — Grid structure explains performance variation

France (nuclear baseload, very stable profile) → 91.7% FrozenElite convergence. Germany (high renewables variability) → 82.5%. Romania (smaller grid, volatile) → 75.3%. The ranking matches expected physics — more stable consumption allows better warm-start initialization.

Finding 3 — Adaptive selector adds minimal advantage over best static genome

FrozenElite (A) ≈ G01static (B) within 0.5pp. The adaptive multi-genome selector provides marginal benefit over simply using the best pre-evolved genome. This suggests G01 generalizes well across contingency types on real data.

Finding 4 — Real profiles are less chaotic than synthetic

FrozenElite+Synthetic (D) achieves only 51% convergence versus 75–92% on real ENTSO-E profiles. Synthetic ShockGenerator creates more extreme inter-zone variability than actual grid operation, making it a conservative (harder) benchmark.

5. Claims & Limitations

What this study claims:
  • On real ENTSO-E 2024 load data applied to IEEE 118-bus, inZORi FrozenElite converges 6–17× more often than NR standard under tight iteration budget (NR_MAX=3)
  • Results are consistent across three structurally distinct European grids (thermal/hydro, renewables-heavy, nuclear-dominant)
  • The warm-start genome approach is robust to real consumption variability, not just synthetic benchmarks
  • Recovery after N-1/N-2/N-4 contingencies is 2–6× faster with FrozenElite vs NR standard
What this study does NOT claim:
  • Results on real national grid topologies (Transelectrica, 50Hertz, RTE) — only IEEE 118-bus tested
  • Real-time operation validation — this is offline simulation on historical data
  • Superiority over deep learning approaches (GNN, RL) for power flow
  • NR_MAX=3 as the only valid operational setting — results will differ with higher iteration budgets

6. Reproducibility

To reproduce:

1. Set ENTSO-E API key: echo "ENTSOE_API_KEY=your_key" > .env
2. Run validation: python3 problems/zor_pf_real_118/run_real_vs_baseline.py
3. Results saved to: results/real_vs_baseline.json

Dependencies: pandapower, entsoe-py, numpy, matplotlib, python-dotenv
Hardware: 12 CPU cores recommended · ~42 minutes total runtime
Data: Automatically downloaded from ENTSO-E Transparency Platform API