Explore/agent app/LLMs and Agentic AI Systems for Smart Grids: A Tutorial on Architectures and Applications
L

Daniela Rojas, Abdulwahab Albassam, Aidan G. Leung, Jett Ngo, Ryan Luo, Peter R. Quawas, Junpyung Kim, Kangkai Liang, Mansi Nanavati, Jonathan Mai, Meng-Chi Tsai, Yun-Tong Tsai, Yize Chen, Yuanyuan Shi/LLMs and Agentic AI Systems for Smart Grids: A Tutorial on Architectures and ApplicationsUnknown

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.

agent app
GitHubCompare
Refreshed 26d ago
OverviewActivity52wAlternativesDocs
Stars0
Forks0
HF Downloads—30d
Last commit—
Refreshed26d ago
Project healthUnknownNo activity data.
Production readinessResearch / EarlyBest for exploration and prototyping.
Risk notesUnknown licenseVerify license before production use.
AgentHub Score
55 / 100
Composite score from 6 signals. How we score →
Active project
55Score
Growth
40C
Activity
30C
Documentation
70C+
Maturity
45C
Community
42C
Production
58C
GitHub stars · 41 days observed0 not enough history
snapshots
Repository activity · 41 days observedReal snapshots from pushed_at
inactivepushed
2026-07-262026-09-06
Practical assessment
Should you use it?

✓ Best for

  • Research and experimentation
  • Prototype development
  • Learning agentic patterns

◎ Strengths

  • Active community
  • Open source
  • Well-documented API

✕ Not ideal for

  • Untested at scale without validation
  • Teams without AI/ML expertise

⚠ Watch-outs

  • Review changelog before updating
  • Verify license for commercial use
Technical details
What's inside
Language—
License—
Sourcearxiv
Open source✗ No
Commercial use—
Docs—
Demo—

AgentHub Score

55
Score 55/100
Below average

Alternatives

O
OccuReward: LLM-Guided Occupant-Centric Reward Shaping for Demographic Equity in Grid-Interactive Buildings
0 · agent app
55
A
A Case Study on Emergent Cheating and Whistleblowing in Autonomous Research Swarms
0 · agent app
55
S
Shifting from Injection to Interaction: Rethinking Web Security in the Age of LLMs and Beyond
0 · agent app
55
U
Unaccountable Delegation, Fading Skills: Mapping the Risks of Workplace AI Agents
0 · agent app
55Compare all →

Recent activity

Latest commit ——
Indexed by AgentHub crawler26d ago
Monitor for new releasesongoing