fix: remove duplicate bidding strategy

[maurerle]

User description

Description

This removes the redundant DsmCapacityHeuristicBalancingNegStrategy/DsmCapacityHeuristicBalancingPosStrategy - it is fine to have both names resolving to the same class, but not good to have duplicated codebase without benefit.

It looks similar, and actually was.

Additionally a bug in the base_market for the list of currently open auctions is fixed. This did not have any known use yet. This was also found in #810

Also
fixes #823

Checklist

• Documentation updated (docstrings, READMEs, user guides, inline comments, docs 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)

---

PR Type

Bug fix, Enhancement, Documentation, Tests

---

Description

• Filter empty additional_fields entries early

• Correctly remove cleared products from open_auctions

• Deduplicate DSM CRM strategies into one

• Update docs, notebook, and tests

---

Diagram Walkthrough

flowchart LR
  cfg["Market config (additional_fields)"]
  mo["MarketConfig.__post_init__ validation"]
  bm["BaseMarket.clear_market"]
  oa["open_auctions set maintenance"]
  stratinit["assume.strategies registry"]
  dsm["DsmCapacityHeuristicBalancingStrategy"]
  tests["Updated tests/docs/examples"]

  cfg -- "sanitize/ignore empty key" --> mo
  bm -- "set subtraction fix" --> oa
  stratinit -- "map pos/neg DSM to one" --> dsm
  dsm -- "usage updated" --> tests

Loading

File Walkthrough

	Relevant files
Error handling	1 files market_objects.py Warn and drop empty `additional_fields`                                    +8/-1
Bug fix	1 files base_market.py Fix `open_auctions` set subtraction bug                                    +1/-1
Enhancement	2 files __init__.py Repoint DSM CRM keys to unified strategy                                  +7/-8      naive_strategies.py Merge DSM pos/neg CRM strategy classes                                      +2/-41
Tests	1 files test_steam_plant.py Update imports and CRM strategy fixtures                                  +5/-6
Documentation	2 files bidding_strategies.rst Refresh strategy API references after rename                          +1/-2      10a_DSU_and_flexibility.ipynb Update notebook to unified DSM strategy                                    +6/-8

---

[github-actions]

PR Reviewer Guide 🔍

(Review updated until commit ad71102)

Here are some key observations to aid the review process:

🎫 Ticket compliance analysis 🔶 810 - Partially compliant Compliant requirements: Preserve existing functionality and expected model behavior while applying fixes. Non-compliant requirements: Reduce memory growth during long-running, concurrent/multi-simulation workloads. Clean up likely sources of retained objects / long-lived references / cache and lifecycle issues. Note changes in release notes (if any). Requires further human verification: Update documentation related to the changes. Reduce memory growth during long-running, concurrent/multi-simulation workloads (requires profiling/benchmarking in representative workloads to confirm). 823 - Partially compliant Compliant requirements: Ensure empty string keys in market config additional_fields are omitted. Warn/fail early during config validation rather than later failing/printing "empty column name" during store_dfs writes. Non-compliant requirements: (empty) Requires further human verification: (empty)

⏱️ Estimated effort to review: 3 🔵🔵🔵⚪⚪

🧪 PR contains tests

🔒 No security concerns identified

⚡ Recommended focus areas for review Behavior Change The new DsmCapacityHeuristicBalancingStrategy no longer includes a market_id field in generated bid dicts (the previous POS/NEG classes set market_id to CRM_pos/CRM_neg). If any downstream code relies on bid["market_id"] for routing, serialization, or grouping, this can trigger a KeyError or mis-classify bids specifically for CRM markets. class DsmCapacityHeuristicBalancingStrategy(MinMaxStrategy): """ Strategy for Positive/Negative CRM Reserve (Demand Side, i.e., up & down, symmetric). """ def calculate_bids(self, unit, market_config, product_tuples, **kwargs): bids = [] max_power = unit.max_plant_capacity min_power = unit.min_plant_capacity for product in product_tuples: start, end, only_hours = product block_times = [dt for dt in unit.index.get_date_list() if start <= dt < end] # For all time steps in block, calculate possible symmetric bid up_caps = [] down_caps = [] for t in block_times: flex = unit.flex_power_requirement.at[t] up_caps.append(max_power - flex) down_caps.append(flex - min_power) # The symmetric bid is the minimum capacity that is possible in *all* timesteps in the block symmetric_capacity = min(min(up_caps), min(down_caps)) if symmetric_capacity > 0: bids.append( { "start_time": start, "end_time": end, "only_hours": only_hours, "price": 0, # or unit.calculate_marginal_cost(...) "volume": symmetric_capacity, "unit_id": unit.id, } ) return self.remove_empty_bids(bids) Possible Issue The check "" in self.additional_fields assumes additional_fields is always an iterable of strings. If additional_fields can be None (or another non-iterable) for some configs, this will raise a TypeError during initialization. Guarding with a truthy/type check (or normalizing to an empty list) would avoid config-time crashes. def __post_init__(self): """ Post-initialization checks for checks on failing initializations. """ if "" in self.additional_fields: warn( "Empty string '' found in 'additional_fields' and will be ignored.", UserWarning, ) self.additional_fields = [f for f in self.additional_fields if f != ""]

[github-actions]

PR Code Suggestions ✨

Latest suggestions up to ad71102
Explore these optional code suggestions:

Category	Suggestion	Impact
Possible issue	Guard against non-iterable fields This membership check will raise if additional_fields is None or otherwise non-iterable during initialization. Guard the check by validating it is an iterable collection before using in, then normalize to a list when filtering. assume/common/market_objects.py [162-167] -if "" in self.additional_fields: +if isinstance(self.additional_fields, (list, tuple, set)) and "" in self.additional_fields: warn( "Empty string '' found in 'additional_fields' and will be ignored.", UserWarning, ) self.additional_fields = [f for f in self.additional_fields if f != ""] Suggestion importance[1-10]: 5 __ Why: Adding an isinstance guard prevents TypeError if self.additional_fields is None or otherwise non-iterable when "" in self.additional_fields runs, improving robustness of __post_init__. Impact is moderate since it’s defensive and may be unnecessary if additional_fields is guaranteed to be a list elsewhere.	Low

---

Previous suggestions

Suggestions up to commit c2bf0a8

Category	Suggestion	Impact
General	Preserve backwards-compatible class names Renaming/removing the two previous strategy classes can break downstream users that still import them. Provide backward-compatible aliases to the new unified strategy so existing imports keep working without changing behavior. assume/strategies/naive_strategies.py [566] return self.remove_empty_bids(bids) + +# Backwards-compatible aliases +DsmCapacityHeuristicBalancingPosStrategy = DsmCapacityHeuristicBalancingStrategy +DsmCapacityHeuristicBalancingNegStrategy = DsmCapacityHeuristicBalancingStrategy + Suggestion importance[1-10]: 6 __ Why: Adding aliases for the removed classes (DsmCapacityHeuristicBalancingPosStrategy/NegStrategy) to point to DsmCapacityHeuristicBalancingStrategy is a practical compatibility improvement that can prevent breakage for external users still importing the old names, without changing runtime behavior of the unified strategy.	Low

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 60.00000% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 82.13%. Comparing base (d8d42d5) to head (ad71102).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
assume/common/market_objects.py	33.33%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #827      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   82.18%   82.13%   -0.06%     
==========================================
  Files          56       56              
  Lines        9087     9072      -15     
==========================================
- Hits         7468     7451      -17     
- Misses       1619     1621       +2     

Flag	Coverage Δ
pytest	82.13% <60.00%> (-0.06%)	⬇️

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 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.

[github-actions]

Failed to generate code suggestions for PR

[github-actions]

Persistent review updated to latest commit ad71102

[reinecfi]

Looks good