Files
goodwe-addon/goodwe_controller/app/arbitrage.py
T
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5 e1b9254626
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 7m42s
SAFETY-45: a price-driven charge is SIZED by the capacity guard, not switched by it
With arbitrage armed at the shipped defaults, arbitrage and the capacity-tariff
guard drove each other in a sustained limit cycle. Re-measured on TEST-23 stage
3's closed rig against 478ba93, metrics recomputed rather than taken from the
card: `peak_cap_w` 1500 / 1200 W house -> 28 charge onsets an hour, mean period
131.1 s, the grid swinging -455.5 to +3200.0 W; at the SHIPPED
`peak_cap_w: 3500` with an 1800 W house -> 8/h, with a 3000 W house -> 32/h.
The bite rule is `load + max_w > peak_cap_w`, i.e. any house over 1500 W in the
cheapest quarter. §10.2: "an EMS that oscillates is worse than no EMS, both for
hardware wear and - per §9.1 - for the peak it is trying to avoid." And it was
losing the argument it was having: EVERY billed quarter in the three affected
configurations finished OVER the cap.

⚠️ THE CARD'S STATED MECHANISM IS WRONG AND THE CORRECTION IS ON THE RECORD.
The card, and .cache/s45.md before it, say the loop is the quarter boundary
resetting the projection and arbitrage re-arming at full power. It is not. Of
the 27 gaps between the 28 onsets, 23 are 90-120 s (mean 111.5 s) and lie
ENTIRELY INSIDE one quarter; the four long gaps - 230, 240, 250, 255 s - are
exactly the four that SPAN a boundary, so the boundary LENGTHENS the interval
rather than causing an onset. The real cycle, off the recorded fields: the trade
charges at max_w while `wanted = batt_w + excess` is negative and the guard
files NOTHING; `wanted` crosses zero; the guard engages on a floor of 5.3 W;
that flips `arbitrage.guard_state()`, which cancels the WHOLE trade; the
grid-following loop - which targets grid = 0, not grid = ceiling - takes the
actuator and discharges to +1870 W, exporting 420 W; the projection collapses;
the guard releases; the trade re-arms at max_w. A binary interlock keyed on a
continuous quantity. A fix aimed at the boundary would have removed four of
twenty-eight onsets.

THE FIX IS A SHAPE THIS ADD-ON ALREADY HAD. `control.maintenance_charge_floor()`
caps a MAINTENANCE charge at "the headroom left under the site's cap", because
"a maintenance charge is the only thing this system does that is big enough and
long enough to set that peak". ⚠️ That sentence stopped being true when OPT-04
landed. `peakguard.charge_headroom_w()` publishes the same quantity off the
MEASURED guard rather than off the optional `peak_forecast_entity` - the hole
SAFETY-25 had to close in `shaping_suspended()` - and `arbitrage.decide()` sizes
its BUY leg to it, keyword-only and with no default.

NO NEW ARITHMETIC AND NO NEW CONSTANT. The number is `wanted_w` read in the
other direction: `decide()` already computes the DISCHARGE that lands the
quarter on the ceiling, and a negative one is a permitted CHARGE of `-wanted`.
⚠️ `peakguard.decide()` IS UNCHANGED - sha256(decide) = 200090d0835a3a55, 7252 B
on this branch and on 478ba93 - so 2026-08-20's anti-bang-bang rung is exactly
where it was, and tools/replay_ac3.py reproduces 190/190 guarded quarters, 110
engaged cycles, 5 blind and 878 Wh on both trees.

TWO PROPERTIES MAKE IT SAFE TO HAND A STRATEGY, BOTH SWEPT RATHER THAN ARGUED.
It is INVARIANT IN THE BATTERY - raise the charge by dW, the meter rises by dW,
so `excess` rises by dW while `batt_w` falls by dW and `wanted` does not move:
1350.0 W at every point across batt_w -5000..+2000 W on one banked quarter,
while the `excess` those runs see takes six distinct values. It is feed-forward,
so consuming it adds no feedback path around the plant. And HOLDING IMPLIES ZERO
OR UNKNOWN: across 1080 swept combinations not one ENGAGED decision answers a
positive headroom.

AFTER, same rig, same command. 1500/1200: 28 onsets -> 1, grid swing 3655.5 ->
282.0 W, energy bought 180.0 -> 285.2 Wh (+58%, because a continuous 300 W trade
beats a 2000 W trade cancelled for 57% of the hour), billed quarters
1490/1497/1509 -> 1500.0/1500.0/1500.0. 3500/1800: 8 -> 1, 3511/3536/3559 ->
3500/3500/3500. 3500/3000: 32 -> 1, 3519/3542/3557 -> 3500/3500/3500. The two
shipped-default rows buy 2.2% and 1.6% LESS energy and in exchange the worst
quarter goes from 59 W over the cap to zero - which is the ordering §10.1 asks
for, since the capacity tariff bills the month's single worst quarter.
⚠️ AND THE NEGATIVE CONTROL: at peak_cap_w 5000 with a 1200 W house, where
`load + max_w` never reaches the cap, the two runs are BIT-IDENTICAL.

⚠️ A NEGATIVE `lo` WAS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED, AND THE REASON IS IN THE CODE.
Deleting `decide()`'s `wanted <= 0` gate and filing `lo = wanted` is the tidier
answer arithmetically. It creates a new `lo > hi` CONTRADICTION against
main.py's cheap-window maintenance shaping, which files a NEGATIVE `hi`;
arbiter.py clause 2 has no notion of one limit out-ranking another, so it
resolves to 0 W - the battery PARKED in the quarter that sets the bill - and the
only way to close that suspends the maintenance charge shaping PERMANENTLY on
every site this card is about. A backoff or cooldown in arbitrage was rejected
too: both modules' design notes say no timer is invented, and the trade now
re-arms at `ceiling - load` rather than at max_w, which is what learning from a
refusal means when the refusal is a measurement.

THE REGRESSION IS THE LOOP SETTLING, NOT A UNIT TEST ON decide().
test_arbitrage.py 3c closes the loop over the shipped guard, strategy, arbiter,
control law and QuarterAverager with a modelled plant, and asserts BOTH
directions: unsized it must run away (24 onsets, -414..+3200 W, a quarter over
the cap) and sized it must settle (1 onset, 303 W swing, three quarters at
exactly 1500.0 W). The two runs differ in one argument. A third pair asserts the
card is INERT where the defect is inert.

Evidence: 29/29 green. 14 mutations, every one RED on a named check, no
survivors; two are ZERO BYTES - `min()` -> `max()` on the sizing, and the
sized-trade sentence's two operands transposed - and both are red. M13 reverts
the 2026-08-20 rung and is red on EIGHT named checks in test_peakguard and three
in test_arbitrage. Every revert verified by a tree fingerprint AFTER the revert,
which is how a defect in the battery's own harness was found: two edits to one
file, restored in list order, left the first one on disk (MUTATION.md habit 18).
test_peakguard.py part 1 also gained a None-safe format, because the mutation it
exists to catch made it raise TypeError one line later and ABORT the file -
parts 2-13 were ungraded and M13's recorded coverage was one check instead of
eight.

Not fixed, and named: TEST-23 finding 1's export overshoot at the END of a trade
(356-938 W, ~0.37 x max_w) is a different card; a house whose load ALONE exceeds
the cap still has the trade refused outright and the loop drive to grid = 0
rather than to the ceiling, and no swept pair reaches that regime; the container
leg (hadrive.py) was not re-run because test23s3-addon is deliberately stopped
as a second writer on the setpoint entity.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
2026-09-14 16:10:34 +02:00

505 lines
26 KiB
Python

"""OPT-04 - §10.1 priority 3: charge cheap, discharge expensive, and only when
the round trip is worth more than it costs.
WHERE THIS LIVES, AND WHY IT IS NOT WHERE THE CARD SAYS. The functional notes
on the Trello card reference specs.md §2.2's `ems/optimizer/...` layout. That
module layout does not exist and is not being built; the product owner's
decision of 2026-08-30 is that everything ships in `goodwe_controller/app/`,
beside price.py, static_tariff.py, peakguard.py and arbiter.py. The BEHAVIOUR
§10.1 / §9.1 / §8.3 / §17 describes is unchanged and still authoritative.
WHAT THIS MODULE IS, AND - MORE IMPORTANTLY - WHAT IT IS NOT
============================================================
Four cards landed before this one and this one CONSUMES all four. Almost every
question an arbitrage strategy has to answer is already answered somewhere
else, by an object built for it, and the single biggest way to get this ticket
wrong is to answer any of them again here:
price.py (TARIFF-02) what a price IS, all-in, and what a product is.
`Uncertainty`, `WIDEN_FACTOR`, `required_spread`.
static_tariff.py (TARIFF-03) `TariffPlan.arbitrage()` - THE VERDICT. Whether
a trade is permitted at all, on which two hours,
against which widened threshold. Five refusal
reasons live there, not here.
price_forecast.py (FCST-03) provisional carrying, and the rule that no
irreversible action rests on a provisional
price (§8.3).
peakguard.py (SAFETY-07) the capacity-tariff floor, filed as a `lo`
LIMIT at P_PEAK on the arbiter.
So what is left for this file is genuinely small, and that is the point:
* WHICH HOUR IS IT NOW - is this instant the buy hour, the sell hour, or
neither.
* MAY THE BATTERY DO IT - state of charge, and §17's negative-price rule.
* HOW HARD - one number, filed as one arbiter claim.
Everything else is delegated, and delegated by CONSTRUCTION rather than by
convention: `TariffPlan.arbitrage()` will not hand over a spread at all unless
it is told whether the peak guard is holding, what a cycle costs, and what is
uncertain. There is no code path here that can reach a tradeable number without
having answered §10.1's priority ordering first.
AC3 - PEAK SHAVING WINS, AND IT WINS TWICE
==========================================
§9.1: "Give peak shaving priority over arbitrage whenever the two conflict."
That is honoured through the two mechanisms that already exist, and NEITHER of
them is re-implemented here:
1. THE INTERLOCK. `plan.arbitrage(peak_guard_active=...)` is keyword-only and
REQUIRED. When the guard is engaged the verdict is a refusal carrying the
§10.1 wording, so `decide()` below never sees a spread at all. It is not
possible to write a caller here that skips the question - the argument has
no default and the spread is unreachable without it.
2. THE ARBITER. Even if (1) were somehow bypassed, `claim()` files a SET at
P_ARBITRAGE (30) and peakguard files a LIMIT at P_PEAK (50). arbiter.py
clause 2 applies every limit whose priority is >= the winning set's, most
restrictive wins - so the peak floor CLAMPS an arbitrage charge whatever
this module thinks. 50 >= 30 is what makes that true, and it is why the
priority below sits under P_PEAK rather than beside it.
Two independent mechanisms for one rule is deliberate. The first is the one
that reports honestly; the second is the one that holds when the first is
wrong.
⚠️ AND THE GUARD MUST BE ABLE TO SEE. On `meter_source: off` there is no
telegram stream, so peakguard.decide() is never run and `peak_guard_active` is
not FALSE - it is UNKNOWN. Charging a battery at max_w creates offtake, offtake
is the billed quantity (§9.1), and doing it deliberately while nothing measures
the quarter is the exact shape of failure §9.1 exists to prevent. So the third
state is carried explicitly as `None` and it REFUSES. A failed read is not an
observation, and "the guard did not run" is not "the guard is clear".
§17's NEGATIVE-PRICE CASE, STATED ONCE
======================================
"Negative-price hours - arbitrage must not export." A negative price means the
market pays the site to consume. Discharging the battery into such an hour
gives away stored energy AND forgoes being paid to take more in; if the house
load is covered it becomes export, which at a negative price is paid-for
disposal. The buy side is untouched - a negative hour is the best possible hour
to charge in, and this file's guard is deliberately asymmetric for that reason.
⚠️ THE GUARD IS ON THE HOUR BEING SOLD INTO, NOT ON THE SPREAD. A series whose
prices are -0.30 and -0.05 has a 0.25 EUR/kWh spread that clears any shipped
threshold, and its DEAREST hour is still negative. A guard written as
"spread > 0" or "the prices are not all negative" passes that case and exports.
WHAT `cycle_cost_threshold_eur` IS, AND WHAT THIS FILE REFUSES TO DO WITH IT
===========================================================================
§10.1 gates arbitrage on "expected round-trip benefit exceeds
`cycle_cost_threshold_eur`". It ships at 0.10 EUR/kWh. On realistic Belgian
day/night numbers the static spread is about 0.08 EUR/kWh, and FCST-03's
widening factors (2.5 real-time, 1.5 no-weather) are honest policy defaults
with nothing to derive them from.
⚠️ SO A STATIC-TARIFF SITE DOES NOT TRADE AT SHIPPED DEFAULTS, AND THAT IS
REPORTED RATHER THAN TUNED AWAY. The threshold is a parameter here, the
behaviour is correct at any value of it, and no number in this file was chosen
to make a trade happen. Whether 0.10 is the right shipped default - and whether
2.5/1.5 are - is one product decision and it belongs to the owner, not to this
card. test_arbitrage.py section 7 reports what the shipped default does over a
replayed year rather than adjusting anything so that it looks better.
THE ACCOUNTING BASIS, AND THE TERM THAT IS DELIBERATELY ABSENT
=============================================================
The card's technical notes ask for `benefit = value_out(d) - cost_in(c)/η`, and
then say of the round-trip efficiency: "η is NOT a §14 key - it needs one, or
must be derived from measured charge/discharge energy in the state store. DO
NOT HARDCODE IT." Both halves are honoured by not having the term at all:
* THE SELL SIDE IS PRICED AS DISPLACED IMPORT, NOT AS EXPORT. The two hours
compared are both all-in CONSUMPTION prices, which is the basis the notes
require ("credit displacement at all-in import prices, not at export price,
or the number flatters itself"). `export_price_eur_kwh` is therefore not
read here at all - §9.3's near-zero Belgian injection price is precisely
why the economically sound trade on this market is charge-cheap-to-
displace-expensive-import, and §17's guard below is the same fact stated as
a rule.
* AND THERE IS NO η, BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING HONEST TO PUT IN IT. No config
key exists, the state store carries no measured charge/discharge energy
pair to derive one from, and a hardcoded 0.85 is exactly what the notes
forbid - it would also DOUBLE-COUNT, because `cycle_cost_threshold_eur` is
already defined as what a round trip costs per kWh and conversion loss is
part of that cost. When a measured η exists it belongs beside the threshold
as a second term, and this file's arithmetic is one subtraction, in one
place, ready for it.
HYSTERESIS (§10.2)
==================
The switching decision is "which hour is it", and an hour is 60 minutes wide,
so the action cannot chatter within one. The other two terms are monotone
inside an hour in the only direction that matters: a charge raises SoC towards
the ceiling and a discharge lowers it towards the floor, so each can stop once
and cannot restart in the same hour. No timer is needed and none is invented.
"""
import logging
import math
from dataclasses import dataclass
from datetime import datetime
from .arbiter import ACTUATOR_SITE, P_ARBITRAGE, Claim
from .price import Absence, price_option
_LOG = logging.getLogger("goodwe.arbitrage")
SOURCE = "arbitrage"
# §10.2 reason codes. Written out because the action log is a user-facing
# artefact and a code assembled from an f-string cannot be grepped for.
CHARGE = "ARBITRAGE_CHARGE"
DISCHARGE = "ARBITRAGE_DISCHARGE"
# Why nothing was done. These are the reasons this MODULE owns; the five
# refusals that belong to the verdict itself are carried through verbatim from
# static_tariff.py rather than restated, so a refusal's wording has exactly one
# author.
IDLE_NO_PLAN = "no tariff plan has been resolved yet"
IDLE_NOT_COVERED = (
"NOT COVERED: meter_source is off, so the capacity-tariff peak guard never "
"runs and nothing measures the quarter this charge would land in. §9.1 puts "
"peak shaving above arbitrage, and an unmeasured peak cannot be shaved - "
"so the honest answer is that arbitrage is not covered on this install, not "
"that the guard is clear")
IDLE_NO_SOC = (
"state of charge is not being read, and a battery whose fill nobody knows "
"cannot be told to empty or to fill")
IDLE_OFF_PEAK_HOUR = "this hour is neither the buy hour nor the sell hour"
# OPT-09. A TRADE NOTHING CAN TAKE IS NOT A TRADE, AND THE ALTERNATIVE IS WORSE
# THAN A MISSED HOUR. `charge_w`/`discharge_w` used to be the site's whole rating
# and are now SIZED to the packs whose state of charge permits that direction, so
# a caller can hand this function a zero. A zero must not reach `claim()`: a
# `Claim.set(..., 0.0)` at P_ARBITRAGE is a PARK ORDER that outranks the loop,
# which is the failure the note on `claim()` is written against - it would
# silently disable self-consumption for the whole hour. So the sizing is checked
# where the decision is made rather than trusted to arrive positive.
IDLE_NO_SIZE = (
"no pack's state of charge permits this side of the trade, so it is sized "
"at 0 W - and a 0 W arbitrage claim is a park order, not a trade")
# SAFETY-45. THE BUY LEG'S SIZE, AND ONLY THE BUY LEG'S - §9.1: "Discharge and
# export are never capped by the peak guard; only charging and import are."
IDLE_NO_HEADROOM = (
"the capacity-tariff guard has measured this billed quarter and it can "
"afford no charging at all, so a trade of any size would push it over the "
"ceiling - and a 0 W arbitrage claim is a park order, not a trade")
IDLE_HEADROOM_UNMEASURED = (
"the capacity-tariff guard did not size this quarter's charging headroom "
"this cycle, and an UNMEASURED headroom is not an unlimited one - charging "
"creates the billed quantity (§9.1) and nothing is measuring the quarter "
"this one would land in")
NEGATIVE_PRICE = (
"§17: the sell hour is priced BELOW ZERO, so discharging into it would give "
"energy away and pay for the privilege. Arbitrage must not export at a "
"negative price")
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class ArbitrageDecision:
"""What the strategy concluded this cycle, with what it concluded it from.
⚠️ NO FIELD HAS A DEFAULT, and that is TEST-14's rule rather than a style
choice: an outcome type's required field quietly gaining a default is a
mutation that survived review in three files in this repository. The
signature is scanned in test_price_forecast.py alongside `Gate`'s and
`Arbitrage`'s constructors, so a default added here later goes red without
anybody remembering to write a case for it.
`action` is None whenever nothing is to be done, and `power_w` is then None
too - not 0.0. Zero watts is a COMMAND (it parks the battery); "no claim"
is the absence of one, and the arbiter must be free to let the loop win.
"""
action: str | None # CHARGE | DISCHARGE | None
power_w: float | None # signed: negative charges, positive discharges
reason: str
spread_eur_kwh: float | None
required_eur_kwh: float | None
price_now_eur_kwh: float | None
@property
def trading(self) -> bool:
return self.action is not None
def explain(self) -> str:
if not self.trading:
return f"arbitrage idle - {self.reason}"
return self.reason
def _idle(reason, *, spread=None, required=None, price=None) -> ArbitrageDecision:
if not reason or not isinstance(reason, str):
raise ValueError(
"an idle arbitrage decision needs a reason a human can act on - "
"§10.2 requires every plan change to carry one, and 'arbitrage did "
"nothing' with no reason is indistinguishable from a bug.")
return ArbitrageDecision(action=None, power_w=None, reason=reason,
spread_eur_kwh=spread, required_eur_kwh=required,
price_now_eur_kwh=price)
def enabled(opts: dict) -> bool:
"""Is the strategy switched on at all? Off in the shipped configuration.
⚠️ OFF BY DEFAULT ON PURPOSE. Every other card in this repository ships its
machinery inert and lets an operator arm it; this one MOVES ENERGY against
the meter on a real battery, so it is the last one that should be an
exception to that.
"""
v = price_option(opts, "arbitrage_enabled")
return v is True or str(v).strip().lower() in ("true", "yes", "on", "1")
def threshold_eur_kwh(opts: dict) -> float:
"""§10.1's `cycle_cost_threshold_eur`, from the one place option defaults live."""
v = float(price_option(opts, "cycle_cost_threshold_eur"))
if not math.isfinite(v) or v < 0:
raise ValueError(
f"cycle_cost_threshold_eur is {v!r}. It is what a round trip COSTS, "
f"in EUR/kWh, so it is non-negative and finite - a negative "
f"threshold is one every spread clears, which is arbitrage with the "
f"brake removed.")
return v
def soc_bounds(opts: dict) -> tuple:
"""(floor, ceiling) in percent. The reserve arbitrage may not spend."""
return (float(price_option(opts, "arbitrage_soc_floor")),
float(price_option(opts, "arbitrage_soc_ceiling")))
def guard_state(peak_decision):
"""The peak guard's answer as the three-state `decide()` takes: T / F / None.
THE ONE PLACE THIS CONJUNCTION IS WRITTEN, and it is public for the reason
`peakguard.shaping_suspended()`, `watchdog.loop_is_following()` and
`freeze.looks_frozen()` are: the check that grades it has to assert on THE
SHIPPED EXPRESSION. A predicate transcribed into its own test is one copy
plus a future disagreement about what the check means, and the copy that
drifts is always the grading one - this repository has three separate
records of exactly that, one of which left every suite green while a
default install parked at 0 W in the quarter that sets the month's bill.
⚠️ `None` IS NOT `False` AND COLLAPSING THE TWO IS THE WHOLE HAZARD. On
`meter_source: off` main.py never runs peakguard.decide() - there is no
telegram stream, so there is no open quarter to project - and the decision
it hands here is None. That is "the guard never ran", not "the guard is
clear", and answering False would arm a strategy whose charging creates the
billed quantity (§9.1) while nothing measures the quarter it lands in.
"""
if peak_decision is None:
return None
return bool(peak_decision.engaged)
def _point_at(plan, when: datetime):
"""The price point covering `when`, or None when the series does not cover it.
⚠️ None IS NOT A PRICE AND IS NOT ZERO. `TariffPlan` raises `Absence` here
rather than answering 0.0, for price.py's reason - "no data" becoming "free"
is the defect the whole outcome-type family exists to remove - and this
turns that into "do nothing", never into "it is cheap".
"""
try:
return plan.read.match(series=lambda r: r.at(when),
no_data=lambda _r: None)
except Absence:
return None
def decide(plan, now: datetime, *, peak_guard_active, charge_headroom_w, soc,
min_spread_eur_kwh, uncertainty, charge_w, discharge_w,
soc_floor_pct, soc_ceiling_pct) -> ArbitrageDecision:
"""Should the battery trade this cycle, and how hard.
⚠️ `peak_guard_active` IS A THREE-STATE ARGUMENT AND ALL THREE ARE REAL.
True (the guard is holding), False (it ran and is clear), and None (it never
ran, because nothing measures this install's quarter). See the module note:
None refuses, because the alternative is a strategy that creates the billed
quantity while the thing that would have limited it is switched off.
⚠️ `charge_headroom_w` IS SAFETY-45's SECOND, CONTINUOUS ANSWER FROM THE
SAME GUARD, AND IT IS NOT A DUPLICATE OF THE FIRST. `peak_guard_active` is a
SWITCH - it says whether the guard is holding - and a switch keyed on a
continuous quantity is what made the loop oscillate: the guard engaged at a
5 W floor, this module refused the whole trade, the loop took the actuator,
the meter fell, the guard released and the trade re-armed AT FULL POWER
130 s later. 28 times an hour, measured. `peakguard.charge_headroom_w()` is
the watts the billed quarter can still afford; sizing the buy leg to it means
the trade is CLAMPED rather than switched, which is the same shape
`control.maintenance_charge_floor()` has always given a maintenance charge.
⚠️ None IS NOT UNLIMITED here either - see IDLE_HEADROOM_UNMEASURED.
⚠️ EVERY OTHER ARGUMENT IS KEYWORD-ONLY AND HAS NO DEFAULT, for
`TariffPlan.arbitrage()`'s reason. A defaulted `soc_floor_pct` is a reserve
floor this module asserted rather than one the operator configured, and the
first time it is wrong the battery is at 0 %.
"""
if peak_guard_active is None:
return _idle(IDLE_NOT_COVERED)
if plan is None:
return _idle(IDLE_NO_PLAN)
verdict = plan.arbitrage(peak_guard_active=peak_guard_active,
min_spread_eur_kwh=min_spread_eur_kwh,
uncertainty=uncertainty)
return verdict.match(
refused=lambda v: _idle(v.reason),
allowed=lambda v: _act(plan, now, v, soc, charge_w, discharge_w,
soc_floor_pct, soc_ceiling_pct,
charge_headroom_w))
def _act(plan, now, v, soc, charge_w, discharge_w, floor_pct, ceiling_pct,
headroom_w):
"""The permitted case: which hour is this, and may the pack do it."""
here = _point_at(plan, now)
if here is None:
return _idle(
f"the series carries a tradeable spread but no price for this "
f"instant ({now.isoformat()}), which is §11.4 for this hour rather "
f"than a reason to reach for a neighbouring one",
spread=v.spread_eur_kwh, required=v.required_spread_eur_kwh)
price = here.eur_per_kwh
buying = here.start == v.cheapest.start
selling = here.start == v.dearest.start
if not (buying or selling):
return _idle(IDLE_OFF_PEAK_HOUR, spread=v.spread_eur_kwh,
required=v.required_spread_eur_kwh, price=price)
# ⚠️ BELT AND BRACES ON §8.3, AND IT IS NOT DEAD CODE. `_firm_or_die` makes
# the two points on the verdict firm at construction, but the point matched
# HERE is whatever `at()` returned for this instant, and the identity of the
# two rests on the series being the one the verdict was built from. An hour
# that is provisional is one nobody published a price for, and no
# irreversible action may rest on it.
if here.provisional:
return _idle(
f"§8.3: the price for this hour ({here.start.isoformat()}) is "
f"CARRIED FORWARD, not published, and no irreversible action may be "
f"taken on a provisional price",
spread=v.spread_eur_kwh, required=v.required_spread_eur_kwh,
price=price)
if soc is None:
return _idle(IDLE_NO_SOC, spread=v.spread_eur_kwh,
required=v.required_spread_eur_kwh, price=price)
common = dict(spread=v.spread_eur_kwh, required=v.required_spread_eur_kwh,
price=price)
if selling:
# §17. THE NAMED REGRESSION CASE. Checked BEFORE the SoC question, so a
# negative price reports the reason that actually forbids the trade
# rather than one that happens to fire first on some other site.
if price < 0:
return _idle(f"{NEGATIVE_PRICE} - this hour is "
f"{price:+.4f} EUR/kWh", **common)
if soc <= floor_pct:
return _idle(
f"the sell hour is here at {price:.4f} EUR/kWh but the pack is "
f"at {soc:g} %, at or under the {floor_pct:g} % reserve floor "
f"arbitrage may not spend (§10.1 priority 4)", **common)
if not abs(float(discharge_w)) > 0.0:
return _idle(IDLE_NO_SIZE, **common)
return ArbitrageDecision(
action=DISCHARGE, power_w=abs(float(discharge_w)),
reason=(f"{DISCHARGE}: this is the dearest firm hour at "
f"{price:.4f} EUR/kWh, {v.spread_eur_kwh:.4f} above the "
f"cheapest and clear of the {v.required_spread_eur_kwh:.4f} "
f"this cycle had to cover; discharging "
f"{abs(float(discharge_w)):.0f} W from {soc:g} %"),
spread_eur_kwh=v.spread_eur_kwh,
required_eur_kwh=v.required_spread_eur_kwh,
price_now_eur_kwh=price)
if soc >= ceiling_pct:
return _idle(
f"the buy hour is here at {price:.4f} EUR/kWh but the pack is at "
f"{soc:g} %, at or over the {ceiling_pct:g} % ceiling - there is "
f"nowhere to put the cheap energy", **common)
if not abs(float(charge_w)) > 0.0:
return _idle(IDLE_NO_SIZE, **common)
# SAFETY-45. THE BILLED QUARTER IS ASKED LAST, AND THE PLACEMENT IS
# DELIBERATE: every refusal that existed before this card keeps the
# precedence it had, so no sentence an operator already reads changes when
# it fires, and the two added here are placed where they cannot displace
# one. The pack's reasons come first because they are properties of the
# hardware in the cupboard; this one is a property of the fifteen minutes
# the trade would land in.
if headroom_w is None:
# ⚠️ NOT "the guard is clear". This is `guard_state()`'s None argument
# one layer down: a headroom nothing measured is not an unlimited one,
# and charging at max_w creates the billed quantity (§9.1).
return _idle(IDLE_HEADROOM_UNMEASURED, **common)
asked_w = abs(float(charge_w))
size_w = min(asked_w, max(0.0, float(headroom_w)))
if not size_w > 0.0:
# ⚠️ NOT IDLE_NO_SIZE, WHICH IS THE LINE ABOVE AND BLAMES THE PACKS.
# `asked_w > 0` is already established here, so the pack may be empty
# and willing and it is the billed quarter that has run out. A refusal
# naming the wrong subsystem sends an operator to the wrong page
# (§10.2), and these two are a whole quarter-hour apart in what they
# ask a human to do about them.
return _idle(IDLE_NO_HEADROOM, **common)
# ⚠️ THE SENTENCE CARRIES BOTH NUMBERS IN THEIR OWN SLOTS, not one figure
# twice. MUTATION.md habit 14: two values in one sentence can be transposed
# by a ZERO-BYTE edit that no byte delta and no shape pin can see, so the
# trade's own size and the guard's headroom are each named by the literal
# text around them.
capped = size_w < asked_w
return ArbitrageDecision(
action=CHARGE, power_w=-size_w,
reason=(f"{CHARGE}: this is the cheapest firm hour at "
f"{price:.4f} EUR/kWh, {v.spread_eur_kwh:.4f} below the dearest "
f"and clear of the {v.required_spread_eur_kwh:.4f} this cycle "
f"had to cover; charging {size_w:.0f} W from {soc:g} %"
+ (f" - SIZED BY THE CAPACITY-TARIFF GUARD: the trade asked for "
f"{asked_w:.0f} W and this billed quarter can afford "
f"{float(headroom_w):.0f} W (§9.1, §10.1 priority 2)"
if capped else "")),
spread_eur_kwh=v.spread_eur_kwh,
required_eur_kwh=v.required_spread_eur_kwh,
price_now_eur_kwh=price)
def claim(decision: ArbitrageDecision) -> Claim | None:
"""The decision as one arbiter claim, or None when nothing is to be traded.
A SET at P_ARBITRAGE, and the priority is the whole §10.1 ordering:
P_PEAK 50 > this, so peakguard's `lo` floor CLAMPS an arbitrage
charge (arbiter clause 2 applies every limit at or
above the winner's priority). AC3, mechanically.
P_MAINT_SHAPE 40 > this, so a maintenance charge window's `hi` shaping is
not overridden by a price opportunity. §12.4's "money
outranks the schedule" is about the PEAK guard, which
is measured and billed; a speculative spread is not
that, and letting it out-rank the pack's balancing
cycle would be this card quietly rewriting §12.
P_LOOP 10 < this, because trading against the meter is the point:
the grid-following loop would otherwise cancel every
charge the moment it created import.
⚠️ NONE MEANS NO CLAIM, NOT A 0 W CLAIM. Filing `Claim.set(..., 0.0)` here
would out-rank the loop with a park order every cycle the strategy had
nothing to say, i.e. it would silently disable self-consumption on any site
that armed arbitrage.
"""
if not decision.trading or decision.power_w is None:
return None
# ⚠️ ON THE SITE ACTUATOR, EXPLICITLY. A trade is bought and sold at the
# grid: the price is a property of the connection and the energy crosses the
# meter. So this is a claim on the SITE target, which the allocator then
# divides - not an instruction to any one pack.
return Claim.set(SOURCE, P_ARBITRAGE, float(decision.power_w),
decision.action, actuator=ACTUATOR_SITE)