Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper explores the integration of large language models (LLMs) and agentic AI systems in smart grid applications, focusing on their use in forecasting, optimization, and control tasks. By introducing a solver-grounded design principle, the authors ensure that numerical outputs are verified through trusted tools, addressing the challenge of LLMs generating plausible yet physically infeasible results. The findings demonstrate significant improvements in performance, with the EVAgent achieving a 7.5-9.5x reduction in unmet energy compared to LLM-only approaches and GridDebugAgent successfully repairing 17 out of 39 contingency cases while reducing violations by 52.3%.
LLMs can be transformed from unreliable output generators to trusted decision-makers in smart grids by grounding their results in verified numerical tools.
Large language models (LLMs) and agentic AI systems have evolved from natural language tasks to using external tools to plan, retrieve, and act in technical domains. In smart grids, recent work applies agentic schemes to forecasting, optimization, and control, wrapping trusted solvers behind language interfaces and orchestrating multi-step workflows. The literature lacks a unified approach to designing and evaluating such systems. LLMs can produce numerically plausible yet physically infeasible outputs, evaluation protocols vary across tasks, and the boundary between what the model should and should not compute is implicit. This paper presents a solver-grounded design principle: a numerical result is reported only when it originates from a trusted tool and passes explicit verification. We review the building blocks of LLM and agentic AI systems for power systems: prompting strategies and agentic architectures. We instantiate the principle in four case studies: wind power forecasting, EV charging scheduling, power flow analysis, and contingency diagnosis, each comparing an LLM-only baseline against its solver-grounded counterpart on identical data and metrics. EVAgent reproduces the CVXPY optimum while reducing LLM-only unmet energy by 7.5-9.5x, and GridDebugAgent repairs 17/39 contingency cases while reducing total violations by 52.3%. We propose a four-group evaluation framework spanning task utility, solver-grounded correctness, faithfulness and safe failure, and cost and latency. A consistent division of labor emerges: the agentic system reliably orchestrates, retrieves, and explains, while trusted tools compute and a verification gate decides what is reported.
