Rolling horizon dsm

[Manish-Khanra]

Related Issue

Closes #804
If no issue exists, delete this line.

Description

This PR implements rolling-horizon optimization for the DSM units, enabling reactive bidding while maintaining inter-temporal feasibility. Previously, DSM units (steel plants, buildings, hydrogen plants, steam generation plants) optimized over the full simulation horizon. This feature allows units to re-optimize shorter look-ahead windows after each market round while carrying forward component states (e.g., storage SoC, operational status).

Checklist

• Documentation updated (docstrings, READMEs, user guides, inline comments, doc folder updates etc.)
• New unit/integration tests added (if applicable)
• Changes noted in release notes (if any)
• Consent to release this PR's code under the GNU Affero General Public License v3.0

Additional Notes (optional)

Key Features

• Rolling-Horizon Mode: Configure via dsm_optimisation_config with horizon_mode, look_ahead_horizon, commit_horizon, and rolling_step keys
• Three Steel Plant Strategies: cost-optimized (default), profile-guided (tracks normalized load profile), and min-demand (enforces hourly minimums)
• Fully Extensible: Removed hardcoded technology-specific logic; new DSM unit types can enable rolling-horizon by setting 3 class attributes and optionally 1 method override
• Production-Ready: All 53 tests passing; backward compatible; comprehensive documentation

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 69.54315% with 180 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 80.40%. Comparing base (9c7a0bf) to head (6e63cb5).
⚠️ Report is 26 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
assume/units/dsm_load_shift.py	67.68%	137 Missing ⚠️
assume/common/forecaster.py	59.25%	11 Missing ⚠️
assume/common/forecast_algorithms.py	80.00%	9 Missing ⚠️
assume/units/steel_plant.py	82.00%	9 Missing ⚠️
assume/strategies/naive_strategies.py	33.33%	8 Missing ⚠️
assume/scenario/loader_csv.py	81.81%	6 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #804      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   80.79%   80.40%   -0.40%     
==========================================
  Files          56       56              
  Lines        8676     9252     +576     
==========================================
+ Hits         7010     7439     +429     
- Misses       1666     1813     +147     

Flag	Coverage Δ
pytest	80.40% <69.54%> (-0.40%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[maurerle]

I did not review the dsm_load_shift.py - but all other files.
There are still a few things to do.

I guess that the way in which units are added to the DSMFlex is not that good, as the code seems to not know which parameters of the class exist.
The result is the need for various hasattr checks, as you never know if a param exists or is initialized.
I suggest using planning mode and a larger context window when using an LLM to help with this..

[maurerle]

I don't like this check - can't we test for something like instance.flexibility_measure == "congestion_management_flexibility" in which case the congestion_indicator is set?
This is more like a general thing

[maurerle]

@Manish-Khanra please rebase/merge and fix the conflicts - then this can be merged :)