FlexMeasures / flexmeasures / 31199747222

84%

push

github

Relax soc-targets along with the other SoC constraints (#2390)

* Relax soc-targets along with the other SoC constraints

An unreachable soc-target made the whole scheduling problem infeasible, so a
single bad target cost the user their entire schedule. Targets were the last
SoC constraint that constraint relaxation did not cover.

A target is a two-sided constraint, so relax it as a stock commitment priced in
both directions: falling short is a shortage, priced like a soc-minima breach,
and overshooting is a surplus, priced like a soc-maxima breach. Reusing the two
existing breach prices means targets need no new flex-context field and follow
relax-soc-constraints/relax-constraints automatically. Targets are relaxed only
when both prices are available, which is the case whenever SoC relaxation is on,
since the defaults are filled in as a pair.

Missed targets are now reported among the unresolved constraints, as the
absolute deviation in either direction. Since a met target leaves no headroom,
targets never produce a "resolved" entry.

Tests that relied on targets being hard now opt out of relaxation explicitly.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_014qPe5bv41RDTuBVtpdxjWH
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <claessen@seita.nl>

* Update the SoC field descriptions that said targets are always hard

The soc-targets description still promised that an infeasible target prevents a
schedule from being computed, which this PR makes untrue, and the two SoC
breach-price descriptions did not mention that they now price targets as well.
These strings are what users read in the flex-model docs table and in OpenAPI,
so the generated specs move with them.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Signed-off-by: F.N. Claessen <claessen@seita.nl>

* Keep the two target-based tests exercising hard targets

test_multi_device_validation_survives_stockless_device builds its invalid
constraint set fr... (continued)

29 of 30 new or added lines in 1 file covered. (96.67%)

17224 of 20499 relevant lines covered (84.02%)

0.84 hits per line