Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
net/publication/325308641
CITATIONS READS
2 228
4 authors, including:
S.K. Bath
Punjab Technical University
16 PUBLICATIONS 218 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Manisha Sharma on 29 August 2018.
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Abstract
Moth flame optimization algorithm is novel nature inspired heuristic paradigm inspired by navigation method of moths in
nature and based on the concept that the moth eventually converges toward the light. This paper presents the application of
MFO algorithm for the solution of non-convex and dynamic economic load dispatch problem of electric power system. The
performance of MFO algorithm is tested for non-convex, convex and dynamic economic load dispatch problem of seven
IEEE benchmarks and the results are verified by a comparative study with lambda iteration method, particle swarm opti-
mization algorithm, genetic algorithm (GA), artificial bee colony, evolutionary programming (EP) and grey wolf optimizer
(GWO). Also, in the proposed research, the impact of renewable energy sources (i.e. wind and solar) has been taken into
consideration along with conventional thermal power generating units. Also, critical analysis has been made for percentage
cost saving with due consideration of solar and wind power units and it has been experimentally observed that the addition
of renewable energy sources to conventional thermal power system results in significant cost saving. Comparative results
show that the performance of Moth Flame Optimizer Algorithm is better than recently developed GWO algorithm and other
well known heuristics and meta-heuristics search algorithms.
Keywords Economic load dispatch problem (ELDP) · Grey wolf optimizer (GWO) · Moth flame optimization (MFO)
123
Vol.:(0123456789)
INAE Letters
reactive power are allowed to vary within certain limits so organism search algorithm (SOS) (Tiwari and Manjaree
as to meet a particular load demand within lowest fuel cost. 2016), Wasp Swarm Algorithm (WSA) (Pinto et al. 2007),
The ultimate aim of the ELD problem is to minimize the Monkey Search Algorithm (MSA) (Mucherino and Seref
operation cost of the power generation system, while sup- 2007), Bee Collecting Pollen Algorithm (BCPA) (Lu and
plying the required power demanded. In addition to this, Zhou 2008), Cuckoo Search Algorithm (CSA) (Yang and
the various operational constraints of the system should Deb 2009), Dolphin Partner Optimization (DPO) (Shiqin
also be satisfied. The problem of ELD is usually multi- et al. 2009), Firefly Algorithm (Yang 2010), Krill Herd (KH)
modal, discontinuous and highly nonlinear. Although the algorithm (Gandomi and Alavi 2012), Fruit fly Optimization
cost curve of thermal generating units are generally mod- Algorithm (FOA) (Pan 2012), Distributed BBO (Khokhar
elled as a smooth curve, the input–output characteristics are et al. 2012). Out of these heuristics evolutionary search algo-
nonlinear by nature because of valve-point loading effects, rithm, some of these are used to solve economic load dis-
Prohibited Operating Zones (POZ), ramp rate limits etc. patch problem (ELDP), combined economic load dispatch
In recent years, various evolutionary, heuristic and meta- problem(CELDP), dynamic economic dispatch problem
heuristics optimization algorithms have been developed (DEDP) and combined economic emission dispatch (CEED)
simulating natural phenomena such as: genetic algorithm and are reported in numerous literatures as: evolutionary
(GA) (Walters and Sheble 1993), Hopfield neural network programming (Sinha et al. 2003), particle swarm optimiza-
algorithm (HNNA) (Park et al. 2010), Chaotic particle tion (Gaing 2003), genetic algorithm (Gaing 2003; Chiang
swarm optimization (CPSO) (Cai et al. 2012) New particle 2005), improved genetic algorithm (Devi and Krishna 2008),
swarm optimization algorithm (NPSO), (Selvakumar and Adaptive PSO and Chaotic PSO (Kumar et al. 2009), car-
Thanushkodi 2007), (ARCGA) Adaptive real coded genetic dinal Priority ranking based Decision making (Singh and
algorithm (Amjady and Nasiri-Rad 2010), Fuzzy adaptive Dhillon 2009), Gravitational Search Algorithm (Duman
hybrid particle swarm optimization algorithm (Niknam et al. 2010; Swain et al. 2012; Güvenç et al. 2012), biogeog-
2010), Improved coordinated aggregation-based particle raphy based optimization (Bhattacharya and Chattopadhyay
swarm optimization (ICA-PSO) (Vlachogiannis and Lee 2010a, b; Rajasomashekar and Aravindhababu 2012), intelli-
2009), Improved particle swarm optimization algorithm gent water drop algorithm (Rayapudi 2011), hybrid harmony
for the non-convex economic dispatch problem (Park et al. search algorithm (Pandi and Panigrahi 2011), Firefly Algo-
2010), GA-API genetic algorithm with ant colony approach rithm (Yang et al. 2012), Cuckoo search algorithm (Adriane
(Ciornei and Kyriakides 2012), Shuffled differential evolu- 2013; Thao and Thang 2014), biogeography based optimiza-
tion (SDE) (Reddy and Vaisakh 2014), Bat algorithm (BA) tion (Rajasomashekar and Aravindhababu 2012), differential
and Firefly algorithm (FA) (Moradi et al. 2016), Differen- harmony Search (Wang and Li 2013), Hybrid particle swarm
tial evolution ant colony optimization technique (DEIANT) optimization and gravitational search algorithm (Dubey et al.
and conducted on IEEE 30 bus system with 6 generating 2013), differential evolution (Ravi and Christober Asir Rajan
units. (Rahmat et al. 2014) Oppositional chemical reaction 2013), modified ant colony optimization (Gopalakrishnan
optimization and 10 unit system including valve point effect and Krishnan 2013), modified harmony search (Secui et al.
without transmission loss with load demand (2700 MW). 40 2014), Hybrid GA-MGA (Kherfane et al. 2014), artificial
unit system with considering the transmission loss (Hazra bee colony (Aydin et al. 2014). Although no optimization
et al. 2015). Improved harmony search algorithm (SWOA) algorithm can perform general enough to solve all optimiza-
(Karthigeyan et al. 2015), Firefly algorithm and 3 thermal tions problems, each optimization algorithm have their own
unit system considering transmission loss and 2 wind units advantages and disadvantages. The brief description of cat-
in which the transmission loss is neglected with different egorized literature survey is summarized below in Table 1.
load demand (50, 100, 125, 150, 200) (Saxena and Gan- The limitations of some of these well known optimiza-
guli 2015), Quassi-Oppositional TLBO and 13 unit system tion algorithms are described below. The major limitations
with load demand (1800 MW). 15unit system included valve of the numerical techniques and dynamic programming
point loading effect, Ramp rate, limits generation limits, Pro- method are the size or dimensions of the problem, large
hibited zone with load demand (2630 MW). 40 unit sys- computational time and complexity in programming. The
tem included valve point loading effect with load demand mixed integer programming methods for solving the eco-
(10,500 MW) (Maity 2016), Symbiotic Organisms Search nomic load dispatch problem fails when the participation
Algorithm (SOS) (Guvenc 2016), Genetic Algorithm (GA) of number of units increases because they require a large
and 3 unit system with load demand of (150 MW). 6 unit memory and suffer from great computational delay. Gradient
system with load demand of (700 MW) (Sharma and Moses Descent method is distracted for Non-Differentiable search
2016), Opposition-based krill herd algorithm (OKHA) spaces. The Lagrangian Relaxation (LR) approach fails to
(Bulbul et al. 2016), Improved teaching learning based obtain solution feasibility and solution quality of problems
optimization (I-TLBO) algorithm (Mondal 2016), Symbiotic and becomes complex if the number of units are more. The
123
Table 1 Literature survey of economic load dispatch problem
Author’s name Technical description Constraints Algorithms and load demand
INAE Letters
Walters and Sheble (1993) This method emulates the optimization technique Power balance constraints. Generator capacity Genetic algorithm (GA) and 3 unit system includ-
found in nature this optimization algorithm constraints. Valve point effect constraints ing the valve point loading effect and transmis-
does not require the strict continuity of classical sion losses with load demand of (850 MW)
techniques. But allows discontinuity and non-
linearity this technique uses the payoff informa-
tion to solve the ELD problems and uses any
type of cost curve with some adjustments
Park et al. (2010) This method presents the Hopfield Neural Net- Equality constraints (system power balance Hopfield neural network algorithm and 3 unit
work is use to solve the economic load dispatch constraints) system including the transmission losses with the
problem with non-convex piecewise quadratic In-equality constraints (generation limit) load demand of (850 MW)
cost function with including the transmission
losses under satisfying the various constraints
Cai et al. (2012) This papers shows the ED problems in a power Power balance constraints. Generator capac- Chaotic particle swarm optimization (CPSO) and
system for the actual power system operation ity constraints. Valve point effect constraints. considering IEEE-26 buses system. 6 unit system
consider the non-linear characteristics of a gen- Ramp rate limit constraints. Generator including transmission losses with load demand
erator such as ramp rate limits and prohibited operation constraints (upper bound and lower (1263 MW). 15 unit system including transmis-
operating zone for the econ0mic load dispatch bound). Line flow constraints sion losses with load demand (2630 MW)
Selvakumar and Thanushkodi (2007) This papers introduces a new PSO (NPSO) Active power balance constraints. Genera- New particle swarm optimization algorithm
and its solution to the non-convex economic tor ramp rate limits constraints. Prohibiting (NPSO) and 6 unit system including prohibited
dispatch problems under satisfying the vari- operating zone constraints. Valve point loading operating zone with load demand (1263 MW).
ous constraints and PSO is use to solve the constraints 40 unit System including valve point effect with
non-linear and non-continuous optimization load demand (10,500 MW)
problems of economic load dispatch
Amjady and Nasiri-Rad (2010) This papers shows the realistic operation of Power balance constraints. Generator capacity Adaptive real coded genetic algorithm (ARCGA)
economic dispatch should take both valve point constraints. Valve point effect constraints and 40 unit system including valve point loading
effects and multi fuels into account to solve the effect with load demand (10,500 MW). 10 unit
ELD problems system including valve point loading effect and
multiple fuel source option, non-smooth and
non- convex cost function with a load demand
(2700 MW)
Niknam (2010) The proposed method is use to solve the ED Power balance constraints. Output generator Fuzzy adaptive hybrid particle swarm optimiza-
problems with considering a the valve point constraints tion algorithm and 13 unit thermal generation
effect in which the FAPSO algorithm is the system including valve point loading effect
main optimizer and nm is the local search tech- is used with the load demand (1800 MW and
nique and use to find out the solution for non- 2520 MW). 40 generating unit system including
linear, non-smooth and non-convex problems valve point loading effect with a load demand of
(10,500 MW)
123
Table 1 (continued)
Author’s name Technical description Constraints Algorithms and load demand
123
Vlachogiannis and Lee (2009) This paper focuses on the performance evaluation Equality constraints (system power balance Improved coordinated aggregation-based particle
of a newly introduced improved coordinated constraints). In-equality constraints (generation swarm optimization (ICA-PSO) and conduct-
aggregation-based particle swarm optimization limit) Valve point loading constraints ing on IEEE-30 bus system with 6 generat-
used for solving the economic load dispatch ing unit with load demand (283.4 MW), 13
problem under satisfying the various constraints unit system with load demand (1800 MW and
2520 MW without power loss and 2520 MW
with power loss), 15 unit system with load
demand (2650 MW without power loss and 2650,
2630 MW considering power loss) etc.
Park et al. (2010) This paper proposes a PSO-based approach for Equality constraints and in-equality constraints Improved particle swarm optimization algorithm
the non -convex Economic Dispatch problem (power balance constraints, generation limit and 40 unit system including valve point load-
with satisfying the heavy constraints constraints ramp rate limit constraints prohib- ing with load demand (10,500 MW), 15 unit
ited operating zone and valve point loading system considering POZ, ramp rate limits, and
constraints transmission network losses with load demand
(2630 MW),10 unit including valve point loading
with load demand (2700 MW), 140 unit system
including ramp rate limits and load demand
(49,342 MW)
Ciornei and Kyriakides (2012) This paper proposes a novel hybrid stochastic Power balance constraints. Transmission con- GA-API genetic algorithm with ant colony
method to solve the non-convex Economic straints. Generation limit constraints. Ramp approach and 3-unit system including valve point
Dispatch problem. This method is a combina- limit constraints. Prohibited operating zone loading. 6-unit system (obtained from IEEE-30
tion of Ant colony approach (API) and Genetic constraints. Spinning reserve constraints bus system) including valve point loading and
algorithm (GA) to solve ED problems ramp rate limits with load demand (1263 MW).
15-unit system including valve point loading and
ramp rate limits with load demand (2630 MW).
40-unit system considering the valve point effect
and power loss with load demand (10,500 MW)
Reddy and Vaisakh (2014) This method uses the DE is an evolutionary Active power balance constraints. Generator Shuffled differential evolution SDE and 13 unit
computation method for optimizing non-linear capacity constraints system including the transmission losses with
and non-differential continues space functions. load demand (1800 MW and 2520 MW). 40 unit
SFLA is a newly developed meta-heuristic algo- system including valve point loading, neglecting
rithm for combinatorial optimization, having a the transmission losses with the load demand
concept, fewer parameters, high performance to (10,500 MW). 140 unit system including valve
solve large scale non-convex ELD problems point loading, ramp rate limits, POZ, transmis-
sion loses are not taken into account with load
demand (49,342 MW)
Moradi et al. (2016) This method is applied for solving online generat- Power balance constraints. Capacity of power Bat algorithm (BA) and Firefly algorithm (FA) and
ing unit ELD problems with some practical generation constraints 3 unit system
constraints and the transmission loses are
included
INAE Letters
Table 1 (continued)
Author’s name Technical description Constraints Algorithms and load demand
INAE Letters
Rahmat et al. (2014) This method is use to solving economic load Equality constraints (system power balance Differential evolution Immumed ant colony optimi-
dispatch problem with valve point effect and constraints). In-equality constraints (generation zation technique (DEIANT) and conducted on
satisfying the other constraints like ramp rate limit) IEEE 30 bus system with 6 generating units
limits, prohibited zone
Hazra et al. (2015) This method is use to solve continues and Power balance constraints. Generation limit Oppositional chemical reaction optimization
non-smooth cost function ELD problems with constraints and 10 unit system including valve point effect
valve point loading effect and multi-fuel option without transmission loss with load demand
including various constraints with and without (2700 MW). 40 unit system with considering the
transmission loss transmission loss
Karthigeyan et al. (2015) This method is use to solve the Economic Load Ramp rate limit constraints. Valve point loading Improved harmony search algorithm and 20 unit
Dispatch problems with the inclusion of ramp constraints system is used including ramp rate limits and
rate limits valve point loading effect with load demand
(925, 1000, 1500, 2000, 2500 MW)
Saxena and Ganguli (2015) This method is use to revolves the wind and solar Equality constraints (System power balance Firefly algorithm and 3 thermal unit system
power estimation through probability density constraints). In-equality constraints (generation considering transmission loss and 2 wind units
function and optimization of ELD problems the limit) in which the transmission loss is neglected with
transmission loses are neglected by renewable different load demand (50, 100, 125, 150, 200)
sources and considering them only for thermal
units
Maity (2016) This method is use to solve the ELD problems Equality constraints (system power balance Quassi-Oppositional TLBO and 13 unit system
with valve point loading effect of thermal constraints). with load demand (1800 MW). 15unit system
power plant but without considering the trans- In-equality constraints (generation limit ramp rate included valve point loading effect, Ramp rate,
mission loses limit prohibited zone) limits generation limits, Prohibited zone with
load demand (2630 MW)
40 unit system included valve point loading effect
with load demand (10,500 MW)
Guvenc (2016) This method is applied for solving the classical Power balance constraints. Capacity of power Symbiotic Organisms Search Algorithm (SOS) and
ELD problems and non-convex ELD problems generation constraints. Ramp rate limits 38 unit system with load demand of (6000 MW).
with some practical constraints and the trans- 3 unit system with load demand of (835 MW). 15
mission loses are also included unit system with load demand of (2630 MW)
Sharma and Moses (2016) This method is applied for solving non-linear Power balance constraints. Power generation Genetic Algorithm (GA) and 3 unit system with
ELD problems with some practical constraints constraints load demand of (150 MW). 6 unit system with
and the transmission loses are also included load demand of (700 MW)
Bulbul et al. (2016) This method is applied for solving the non- Power balance constraints. Capacity of power Opposition-based krill herd algorithm (OKHA)
smooth and highly non-linear ELD problems generation constraints. Ramp rate constraints. and 6 unit system including prohibited zone and
with some practical constraints and the trans- Prohibited operating zone constraints. Spinning ramp rate limits with load demand (1263 MW).
mission loses are included reserve. Constraints. Valve point loading effect 10 unit system including valve point effect
and multi -fuel options with load demand
(2700 MW). 40 unit system including transmis-
sion loses and valve point. 140 unit system with
load demand (49,342 MW)
123
INAE Letters
tion with probability one. But it takes much time to reach the
near-global minimum. Particle swarm optimization (PSO)
This method is powerful meta-heuristic optimiza- Power balance constraints. Generation limit
Equality constraints (system power balance
123
INAE Letters
algorithm proposed by Mirjalili et al. (2014) and has the satisfying all generating utilities constraints and various
ability to converge to a better quality near-optimal solu- operational constraints of the electric utilities. The economic
tion and possesses better convergence characteristics than load dispatch problem (ELDP) is a constrained optimization
other prevailing techniques reported in the recent literatures. problem and it can be mathematically expressed as follows
Also, GWO has a good balance between exploration and (Dhillon and Kothari 2010):
exploitation that result in high local optima avoidance, but ∑
U
the computation of GWO algorithm becomes slow, when min[FC(Pn )] = (𝛼n P2n + 𝛽n Pn + 𝛾n ) $∕Hour
applied to economic dispatch problem of medium and large n=1 (1)
scale power system. To overcome the drawbacks of recently
Subject to:
developed GWO algorithm, newly developed Moth Flame
Optimizer (MFO) algorithm developed by Mirjalili (2015)
(1) The energy balance equation:
is tested for the solution of non-convex and dynamic eco-
nomic load dispatch problem of electric power system in the
In conventional economic load dispatch problem, the
proposed research.
energy balance equation may be mathematically represented
as per Eq. (2a).
Economic Load Dispatch Problem ∑
U
Formulation Pn = PDemand + PLoss . (2a)
n=1
The scheduling of electric utilities along with the distribu-
tion of the generation power which must be planned to meet In the proposed research, in order to study the impact of
the load demand for a specific time period represents the wind and solar power, the energy balance equation may be
Unit Commitment Problem (UCP). Economic Load Dispatch modified as per Eqs. (2b) and (2c).
Problem (ELDP) refers the optimal generation schedule for
∑
U
the generation system to deliver the required load demand Pn = PDemand + PLoss − PWind , (2b)
plus transmission loss with the optimal generation fuel cost. n=1
Noteworthy economical benefits can be achieved by search-
ing a better solution to the Economic Load Dispatch Prob- ∑
U
lem (ELDP). The economic dispatch problem is defined so Pn = PDemand + PLoss − PSolar . (2c)
as to optimize the total operational cost of an electric power n=1
system while meeting the total load demand plus transmis- To study the impact of combined solar-wind-thermal sys-
sion losses within utilities generating limits (Dhillon and tem, the power balance constrained can be handled as per
Kothari 2010). The overall objective of Economic Load Dis- Eq. (2d).
patch Problem (ELDP) of electric power system is to plan
∑
U
the devoted (Committed) electric utilities outputs so as to Pn = PDemand + PLoss − PSolar − PWind .
congregate the load demand at optimal operating cost while n=1 (2d)
123
INAE Letters
(2) The inequality constraints: The constrained economic load dispatch problem can be
converted to unconstrained ELD problem using penalty of
definite value, which can be mathematically expressed as:
Pnmin ≤ Pn ≤ Pmax
n
(n = 1, 2, 3, … , U). (3)
∑
U
where 𝛼n , 𝛽n and 𝛾n are cost coefficients. PDemand is load min[FC(Pn )] = Fn (Pn ) + 1000
demand. PLoss is power transmission loss. U is the number n=1
|(∑ ∑ ∑
)|
of generating units. Pn is real power generation and will act | U U U
|
∗ || Pn − PDemand − Bnm Pn Pm ||.
as decision variable. | n=1 |
| n=1 m=1 |
The most simple and approximate method of express-
(5a)
ing power transmission loss, PLoss as a function of generator
powers is through George’s Formula using B-coefficients In order to study the impact of wind power, the Eq. (5a)
and mathematically can be expressed as (Dhillon and will be mathematically modelled as per Eq. (5b).
Kothari 2010):
∑
U
min[FC(Pn )] = Fn (Pn ) + 1000
∑∑
U U
n=1
PLoss = Pgn Bnm Pgm MW, (4) |(∑ ∑ ∑
)|
| U U U
|
n=1 m=1 |
∗| Pn − PDemand − PWind − Bnm Pn Pm ||
| n=1 |
| n=1 m=1 |
where, Pgn and Pgm are the real power generations at the nth
(5b)
and mth buses, respectively.
Bnm is the loss coefficients which are constant under cer- For the consideration of impact of solar power, the
tain assumed conditions and U is the number of generating Eq. (5a) will be mathematically modelled as per Eq. (5c).
units.
Lambda iteration (dos Santos 150 33.4401 64.0974 55.1011 1599.9 2.66 250 NA
Coelho and Lee 2008)
PSO (dos Santos Coelho and Lee 150 33.0858 64.4545 54.8325 1598.79 2.37 250 NA
2008)
GWO (Kamboj et al. 2015) 150 30.4998 64.6208 54.8994 1597.4815 2.3444 250 4.761541
MFO 150 32.8101 64.595 54.9369 1597.482 2.342 250 2.252332
123
INAE Letters
Convergence of MFO for 3-Generating Unit Test System[Load Demand=850 MW] Convergence of MFO for 3-Generating Units Test System[Load Demand=1050 MW]
3.927
10
MFO MFO
4.012
10
3.925
10
Fule Cost(Rs./Hour)--------->
Fuel Cost(Rs./hour)-------->
3.923 4.01
10 10
3.921
10
4.008
10
3.919
10
4.006
3.917
10
10
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Iteration--------> Iteration---------->
(a) (b)
Fig. 3 a, b The convergence curve of test case-II for load demand of 850 and 1050 MW
123
INAE Letters
Worst cost
U
2161.316
min[FC(Pn )] = (𝛼n P2n + 𝛽n Pn + 𝛾n ) + 1000
n=1
| (∑
–
–
–
–
–
–
| U
∗ ||abs Pn − PDemand − PWind − PSolar
|
| n=1
Average cost
)|
∑ ∑
2050.304
U U
|
− Bnm Pn Pm ||.
|
n=1 m=1 |
–
–
–
–
–
–
(6b)
The complete unconstrained economic load dispatch
2029.665
problem with valve point effect having (U-1) variables can
Best cost
be represented as:
–
–
–
–
–
–
∑
U
(
min[FC(Pn )] = 𝛼n P2n + 𝛽n Pn + 𝛾n
n=1
|( )|)
Cost (Rs./h)
+ || 𝛿n × sin(𝜀n × (Pmin | + 1000
2412.709
2412.538
2252.572
2030.673
2030.259
2029.665
− P |
2140.97
n n
| |
(U )
∑ ∑
U U
∑
∗ abs Pn − PDemand − Bnm Pn Pm .
n=1 n=1 m=1
(7)
209.815819
227.0275
125.4804
209.0692
209.8235
210.0079
Moth‑Flame Optimizer and Mathematical
272.042
Formulation
U5
Moth-Flame Optimization algorithm is a novel nature
inspired heuristic paradigm, proposed by Mirjalili (2015),
28.37844
73.11176
inspired by navigation method of moths in nature and based
28.38
U4
75
75
75
75
on the concept that the moth eventually converges toward the
light. The main brainwave of this optimization is direction-
finding manner of moth in nature called transverse orienta-
112.673503
tion. Moths fly in night always securing a definite angle with
147.5229
109.4146
113.7999
113.4005
Table 5 Economic load dispatch for 5-generating units (load demand = 730 MW)
147.535
101.5736
102.0669
102.9911
109.014
below:
The mathematical model of moth flame optimization
218.0184
229.5195
225.3845
229.5247
229.5196
229.803
730
730
730
730
730
730
730
⎢
, (8)
⋮ ⋮ ⋮ ⋮⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎣ mn,1 mn,2 ⋯ mn,d ⎦
Method
APSO
MFO
ABC
PSO
GA
EP
123
INAE Letters
600 MW Lambda iteration 23.7909 10.22 95.25 10.12309 202.967 181.34 32132.29 14.7988 –
PSO 23.8602 10 95.6394 100.7081 202.8315 181.1978 32094.72 14.2373 –
MFO 23.88 10 95.66 100.71 202.89 181.08 32091.51 14.2361 3.680353
700 MW Lambda iteration 28.29 10.0901 118.9873 118 230.2372 213.9068 36912.32 19.5114 –
PSO 28.29 10 118.9583 118.6747 230.763 212.7449 36912.22 19.43 –
MFO 28.31 10 118.9789 118.6792 230.822 212.6321 36908.44 19.43036 4.290743
800 MW Lambda iteration 32.9521 14.7126 141.5988 136.0345 258.1009 243.8011 41897.25 27.5 –
PSO 32.586 14.4839 141.5475 136.0435 257.6624 243.0073 41896.7 25.33 –
MFO 32.6137 14.5005 141.5637 136.0446 257.7167 242.8893 41892.38 25.3285 3.619414
900 MW Lambda iteration 36.9889 22.1821 163.01 153.2168 284.1482 273.0581 47045.32 32.6131 NA
PSO 36.848 21.0774 163.9304 153.263 284.1696 272.7301 47045.25 31.98 NA
MFO 36.87737 21.09383 163.9459 153.2269 284.2233 272.6181 47040.35 31.98542 3.605298
1000 MW Lambda iteration 40.3969 28.1002 187 171.2136 310.721 303.1006 52362.07 40.5323 NA
PSO 41.1657 27.7786 186.5604 170.5795 310.8297 302.568 52361.65 39.4821 NA
MFO 41.19 27.79 186.57 170.57 310.88 302.45 52355.77 39.479 3.571859
123
INAE Letters
where d is the number of variables (i.e. population or dimen- The moth flame optimization (MFO) algorithm is three-
sion) and n is the number of moths (i.e. generating units). tuple that approximates the global optimal of optimization
The corresponding fitness values (i.e. optimal cost) for problem and can be represented as:
all moths (i.e. generating units) can be stored in a array as
represented below:
MFO = (I, P, T), (12)
where I, P and T are three functions.
⎡ OM1 ⎤ The function I generates a random population of moths
⎢ OM ⎥ and corresponding fitness values and mathematically can be
⎢ 2⎥
represented as:
OM = ⎢ OM3 ⎥, (9)
⎢⋮ ⎥
⎢ OM ⎥
I ∶ 𝛷 = {M, OM} (13)
⎣ n⎦ The function P moves the moths around the search space.
It receive the matrix M and returns its updated one eventu-
ally and mathematical represented as:
where n is the number of moths.
Similar to moths, the set of flames in a matrix can be P∶M→M (14)
represented as: The function T returns true if the termination criterion is
satisfied and return false if the termination criterion is not
⎡ F1,1 F1,2 F1,3 … F1,d ⎤
⎢F F2,2 F2,3 … F2,d ⎥ satisfied and mathematically can be represented as:
F = ⎢ 2,1 ⎥ , (10)
⎢… … … … ⎥ T ∶ M → {True, False} (15)
⎣ Fn,1 … … Fn,d ⎦n×d
The function I is used generate initial generation
schedule and to calculate fuel cost value. The random
where d is the number of variables (i.e. population or dimen- generation used in function I can be implemented using
sion) and n is the number of moths (i.e. generating units). algorithm mentioned below: The framework of MFO algo-
The corresponding fitness values for all flames can be rithm with I, P and T can be updated as:
stored in a array as represented below:
⎡ OF1 ⎤
⎢ ⎥
⎢ OF2 ⎥
OF = ⎢ OF3 ⎥. (11)
⎢ ⎥
⎢ ⋮⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎣ OFn ⎦
123
INAE Letters
123
INAE Letters
The maximum and minimum generating capacity of gen- standard IEEE bus systems have been taken into considera-
erating units can be defined as: tion. The performance of the proposed MFO algorithm is
Pmax = [ P max1 P max2 P max3 ⋯ P maxn−1 P maxn ] , tested in MATLAB 2013a (8.1.0.604) software on Intel®
core™ i-5-3470S CPU@ 2.90 GHz, 4.00 GB RAM system.
(16)
where Pmaxi represents the maximum capacity of ith unit
Test System‑I: 3‑Generating Unit System
Pmin = [ P min1 P min2 P min3 ⋯ P minn−1 P minn ] , Considering Transmission Losses
(17)
where Pmini represents the maximum capacity of ith unit The first test system consists of 3-Generating units with a
After the initialization, the function P is iteratively run load demand of 150 MW (dos Santos Coelho and Lee 2008).
until the function T returns true. The P function is the main Test data of 3-Generating Unit System are taken from (dos
function that moves the moths around the search space. In Santos Coelho and Lee 2008), Loss Coefficients Matri-
order to mathematically model the transverse orientation, ces are used to calculate the corresponding Transmission
we update the position of each moth with respect to a flame losses. The algorithm is tested for 250 iterations and the
using the following equation: corresponding results are compared with lambda iteration
method (dos Santos Coelho and Lee 2008), particle swarm
Mi = S(Mi , Fj ), (18) optimization (PSO) (dos Santos Coelho and Lee 2008) and
where, S indicates the spiral function, Fj indicates the jth grey wolf optimizer (GWO) (Kamboj et al. 2015). Table 2
flame and Mi indicates the ith moth. shows that optimal fuel cost for 3-unit generating model for
By selecting logarithmic spiral as the main mechanism 150 MW load demand using GWO and MFO algorithm is
of moths, the logarithmic spiral for MFO algorithm can be 1597.4815 Rs/h, power loss using MFO is 2.3420 MW and
represented as: Iteration time for MFO algorithm is 2.252 s, which shows
the superiority of MFO algorithm over GWO and population
S(Mi , Sj ) = Di .ebt . cos(2𝜋t) + Fj , (19) based PSO algorithm. MFO algorithm completely converges
in 58 iterations and takes Iteration time of 2.2523 s while
where Di indicates the distance of ith moth for jth flame, b
GWO algorithm takes 92 iterations for convergence and con-
is a constant for defining the shape of the logarithmic spiral
verges times of 4.761541 s.
and t is a random number in [− 1,1]. Di of Eq. (19) can be
calculated as:
Test System‑II: 3‑Generating Unit System Without
| | Transmission Losses
Di = |Fj − Mi | (20)
| |
The second test system also consisting of 3-Generating
The position updating moths with respect to n different
Unit System (Bestha et al. 2014) is tested for two differ-
locations in search space may degrade the exploitation of
ent load demands of 850 and 1050 MW including transmis-
the best promising solutions. To resolve this issue, following
sion losses. The corresponding results are compared with
mathematical mechanism is adopted (Fig. 2):
lambda iteration method (Bestha et al. 2014), genetic algo-
( ) rithm (GA) (Bestha et al. 2014), particle swarm optimization
N−1
flameNo. = round N − l ∗ (21) (PSO) (Bestha et al. 2014; dos Santos Coelho and Lee 2008),
T
artificial bee colony (ABC) (Bestha et al. 2014) and grey
wolf optimizer (GWO) (Kamboj et al. 2015). Tables 3 and
Test Systems, Results and Discussion 4 shows the comparison of results with different methodolo-
gies and it is found that optimal value of fuel cost obtained
In order to show the effectiveness of the MFO Algorithm by MFO algorithm is much less that lambda iteration, GA,
for Economic Load Dispatch Problem, six benchmark test PSO, ABC and GWO. The convergence curve of test case-II
system of small and medium scale power systems having is shown in Fig. 3a, b.
123
INAE Letters
4.27
10
Valve point effect is taken into consideration, but transmis-
sion losses are neglected while calculating optimal fuel cost.
10
4.26 The results obtained by MFO algorithm are compared with
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
lambda iteration method (Bestha et al. 2014), genetic algo-
Iteration------>
rithm (GA) (Bestha et al. 2014), particle swarm optimiza-
(b) The convergence curve of test case-V for Load demand of 1800 MW tion (PSO) (Bestha et al. 2014), APSO (Bestha et al. 2014),
4.399
10
Convergence of MFO for 13- Generating Units Test System[Load Demand=2520 MW]
artificial bee colony(ABC) (Bestha et al. 2014), evolution-
ary programming (EP) (Bestha et al. 2014) and grey wolf
MFO
4.396
4.393
10
comparison of results with different methodologies and it is
10
4.39 found that optimal value of fuel cost obtained by MFO algo-
4.387
rithm is much less that lambda iteration, GA, PSO, APSO,
10
ABC, EP and GWO.
4.384
10
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Iteration-------->
Test System‑IV: 6‑Generating Unit System Without
(c) The convergence curve of test case-V for Load demand of 2520 MW
Valve Point Effect
Convergence of MFO for 40-Generating Units Test System[Load Demand=10500 MW]
10
5.14 MFO The fourth test case consists of 6-Generating unit System
10
5.13
without valve point loading (dos Santos Coelho and Lee
2008). The results of 6-generating units systems are tested
Fuel Cost($/Hour)------->
5.12
10
10
5.11
for load demands of 600, 700, 800, 900 and 1000 MW and
10
5.1
are shown in Table 6 and effectiveness of MFO for 6-gener-
10
5.09
ating unit system is compared with lambda iteration method
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
(dos Santos Coelho and Lee 2008), particle swarm optimiza-
Iteration-------->
tion (PSO) (dos Santos Coelho and Lee 2008) and grey wolf
(d) The convergence curve of test case-VI for Load demand of 10500 MW optimizer (GWO) (Kamboj et al. 2015). Corresponding anal-
ysis of results (Table 6) shows that MFO algorithm yields
Fig. 4 a The convergence curve of test case-III for Load demand of better fuel cost and power loss as compared to Lambda-Iter-
730 MW. b The convergence curve of test case-V for Load demand of ation Method, Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm and
1800 MW. c The convergence curve of test case-V for Load demand
of 2520 MW. d The convergence curve of test case-VI for Load
Grey Wolf Optimizer. Also, the convergence of algorithm is
demand of 10,500 MW much better than these algorithms.
123
INAE Letters
Table 10 24-h Load Demand pattern, solar and wind power for 10-generating unit system
Hour Load demand Solar power Wind power (MW) Hour Load demand Solar power (MW) Wind power (MW)
(MW) (MW) (MW)
et al. 2008; Chen 2007). The results of 13-generating units PSO-SQP, UHGA, GA-MU, IGAMU, ACO and EDSA. Cor-
systems are tested for load demand of 2520 MW and are responding analysis of results (Table 7) shows that MFO
shown in Table 7 and effectiveness of MFO for 13-generat- algorithm yields better fuel cost and power loss as compared
ing unit system is compared with SA, GA, GA-SA, EP-SQP, to SA, GA, GA-SA, EP-SQP, PSO-SQP, UHGA, GA-MU,
123
INAE Letters
IGAMU, ACO and EDSA. Also, the convergence of algo- Test System‑VII: 10‑Generating Unit System
rithm is much better than these algorithms. Considering Impact of Solar and Wind Power
Test System‑VI: 40‑Generating Unit System In order to consider the impact of renewable energy sources
with Valve Point Effect (i.e. wind and solar power), the case of dynamic ecomic
load dispatch problem of realistic power system has been
The sixth test case consists of 14-Generating unit System taken into consideration, which consist of 10-thermal power
with valve point loading (Ling et al. 2008; Victoire and Jeya- generating units, whose fuel cost coefficients, minimum
kumar 2004; Sinha et al. 2003; Liu and Cai 2007; Park et al. and maximum power ratings are given in Table 9. The load
2005; Pereira-Neto et al. 2005; Selvakumar and Thanush- demand pattern of 24-h has been taken into consideration
kodi 2007; Ling and Leung 2007; Chiang 2007; Wang et al. to study the dynamic economic load dispatch problem. The
2007; Coelho and Mariani 2006; Selvakumar and Thanush- available wind power and solar power pattern for 24-h time
kodi 2008). The results of 40-generating units systems are horizon is shown in Table 10. In order to study the impact
tested for load demand of 10,500 MW and are shown in of available wind and solar power, four different test studies
Table 8 and effectiveness of MFO for 13-generating unit sys- are taken into consideration. In first case study, the dynamic
tem is compared with others heuristics, meta-heuristics and economic load dispatch problem is solved for 24-h time
evolutionary algorithms. Corresponding analysis of results period and corresponding dispatch of thermal generating
(Table 8) shows that MFO algorithm yields better fuel cost units is depicted in Table 11. The second case study consist
and power loss as compared to others well known heuristics, of dispatch of thermal generating units with due considera-
meta-heuristics and evolutionary algorithms. The conver- tion of available wind power and their corresponding solu-
gence curves for test system-III–VI are shown in Fig. 4a–d. tions are shown in Table 12. The third case study consist of
123
INAE Letters
123
INAE Letters
Table 14 Solution of dynamic economic load dispatch considering impact of wind and solar power
Hour P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P10 Hourly power Hourly fuel cost ($)
supplied (MW)
loss. Also, convergence of MFO is very fast as compared of renewable energy sources to conventional thermal power
to Lambda Iteration Method, Particle Swarm Optimization system results in significant cost saving.
(PSO) algorithm, Genetic algorithm (GA), APSO, Artificial Thus, this algorithm may become very promising for
Bee Colony (ABC), ACO, SA, SA-GA, BBO, HDE, APSO, solving some more complex power system optimizations
IGA and grey wolf optimizer (GWO) for small scale power problems such as: Economic Load Dispatch for quadratic
systems and much better than various well known heuristics and cubical cost function, Single and Multi-objective Eco-
and meta-heuristics algorithms for medium scale systems. nomic Load Dispatch including valve point effect, Economic
Also, It has been observed that the MFO has the abil- Load Dispatch incorporating wind Power, Economic Load
ity to converge to a better quality near-optimal solution Dispatch incorporating Solar Power, Hydro-Thermal and
and possesses better convergence characteristics than other Wind-Thermal Scheduling of electric power system. Ther-
widespread techniques reported in the recent literatures. It is mal Scheduling incorporating Smart Grids, Hydro-Thermal
also clear from the results obtained by different trials show Scheduling incorporating Smart Grids, Single and Multi
that the MFO shows a good balance between exploration Objective Unit Commitment Problem formulation, Multi-
and exploitation that result in high local optima avoidance. Objective and Multi-Area Unit Commitment Problem.
Also, it has been experimentally observed that the addition
123
INAE Letters
Fig. 5 a Comparative hourly fuel cost of thermal generating units parative hourly fuel cost of thermal generating units considering
considering impact of wind power. b Comparative hourly fuel cost of impact of wind and solar power. d Comparative hourly fuel cost of
thermal generating units considering impact of solar power. c Com- thermal generating units considering impact of wind & solar power
Future Scope
References
Adriane BS (2013) Cuckoo search for solving economic dispatch load
problem. Intell Control Autom 4:385–390
Alsumait JS, Sykulski JK, Al-Othman AK (2010) A hybrid GA–PS–
SQP method to solve power system valve-point economic dispatch
problems. Appl Energy 87:1773–1781
Al-Sumait JS, Al-Othmam AK, Sykulski JK (2007) Application of
pattern search method to power system valve-point economic load
dispatch. Electr Power Energy Syst 29(10):720–730
Amjady N, Nasiri-Rad H (2010) Solution of nonconvex and nonsmooth
economic dispatch by a new adaptive real coded genetic algo-
rithm. Expert Syst Appl 37(7):5239–5245
Aydin D, Ozyon S, Yaşar Celal, Liao Tianjun (2014) Artificial bee
colony algorithm with dynamic population size to combined eco-
nomic and emission dispatch problem. Int J Electr Power Energy
Fig. 6 a Overall fuel cost of thermal generating units considering impact Syst 54:144–153
of wind and solar power. b Percentage cost saving of for dynamic eco-
nomic load dispatch problem considering impact of wind and solar power
123
INAE Letters
Bestha M, Reddy KH, Hemakeshavulu O (2014) Economic load dis- Gopalakrishnan R, Krishnan A (2013) An efficient technique to solve
patch with valve-point result employing a binary bat formula. Int combined economic and emission dispatch problem using modi-
J Electr Comput Eng IJECE 4(1):101–107 fied Ant colony optimization. Sadhana 38(4):545–556
Bhattacharya A, Chattopadhyay PK (2010a) Solving complex eco- Guvenc U et al (2016) Application of symbiotic organisms search algo-
nomic load dispatch problems using biogeography-based optimi- rithm to solve various economic load dispatch problems. Inno-
zation. Expert Syst Appl 37(5):3605–3615 vations in intelligent systems and applications (INISTA), 2016
Bhattacharya A, Chattopadhyay PK (2010b) Application of biogeog- International Symposium on IEEE, 2016
raphy-based optimization for solving multi-objective economic Güvenç U, Sönmez Y, Duman S, Yörükeren N (2012) Combined eco-
emission load dispatch problems. Electr Power Compon Syst nomic and emission dispatch solution using gravitational search
38(3):340–365 algorithm. Sci Iran 19(6):1754–1762
Bhattacharya A, Chattopadhyay PK (2010c) Solving complex eco- Hazra S, Roy PK, Sinha A (2015) An efficient evolutionary algorithm
nomic load dispatch problems using biogeography-based optimi- applied to economic load dispatch problem. Computer, Commu-
zation. Expert Syst Appl 37:3605–3615 nication, Control and Information Technology (C3IT), 2015 Third
Bulbul SMA et al (2016) Opposition-based krill herd algorithm applied International Conference on IEEE, 2015
to economic load dispatch problem. Ain Shams Eng J. https://doi. Kamboj VK, Bath SK, Dhillon JS (2015) Solution of non-convex eco-
org/10.1016/j.asej.2016.02.003 nomic load dispatch problem using grey wolf optimizer. Neural
Cai J et al (2012) A hybrid CPSO–SQP method for economic dis- Comput Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-015-1934-8
patch considering the valve-point effects. Energy Convers Manag Karthigeyan P et al (2015) Comparison of harmony search algorithm,
53(1):175–181 improved harmony search algorithm with biogeography based
Chaturvedi KT, Pandit M, Srivastava L (2008) Self-organizing hier- optimization algorithm for solving constrained economic load
archical particle swarm optimization for non-convex economic dispatch problems. Proc Technol 21:611–618
dispatch. IEEE Trans Power Syst 23(3):1079–1087 Kherfane RL, Younes M, Kherfane N, Khodja F (2014) Solving eco-
Chen CL (2007) Non-convex economic dispatch: a direct search nomic dispatch problem using hybrid GA-MGA. Energy Proc
approach. Energy Convers Manag 48:219–225 50:937–944
Chiang C-L (2005) Improved genetic algorithm for power economic Khokhar B, Parmar KPS, Dahiya S (2012) Application of biogeog-
dispatch of units with valve-point effects and multiple fuels. Power raphy-based optimization for economic dispatch problems. Int J
Syst IEEE Trans 20(4):1690–1699 Comput Appl (0975–888) 47(13):25–30
Chiang CL (2007a) Genetic-based algorithm for power economic load Kumar KS, Rajaram R, Tamilselvan V, Shanmugasundaram V, Naveen
dispatch. IET Gener Transm Distrib 1(2):261–269 S, Jayabarathi IM (2009) Economic dispatch with valve point
Chiang CL (2007b) Genetic-based algorithm for power economic load effect using various PSO Techniques. Power 2(6):130–135
dispatch. IEE Proc Gener Transm Distrib 1(2):261–269 Ling SH, Leung FHF (2007) An improved genetic algorithm with
Ciornei I, Kyriakides E (2012) A GA-API solution for the economic average-bound crossover and wavelet mutation operation. Soft
dispatch of generation in power system operation. IEEE Trans Comput 11(1):7–31
Power Syst 27(1):233–242 Ling SH, Iu HHC, Chan KY, Lam HK, Yeung BCW, Leung FH (2008)
Coelho LDS, Mariani VC (2006) Combining of chaotic differential Hybrid particle swarm optimization with wavelet mutation and
evolution and quadratic programming for economic dispatch its industrial applications. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part B
optimization with valve-point effect. IEEE Trans Power Syst Cybern 38(3):743–763
21(2):989–996 Liu D, Cai Y (2007) Taguchi method for solving the economic dispatch
Dakuo H, Fuli W, Zhizhong M (2008a) Hybrid genetic algorithm for problem with non-smooth cost functions. IET Gener Transm Dis-
economic dispatch with valve point effect. Electr Power Syst Res trib 1(5):793–803
78:626–633 Lu X, Zhou Y (2008) A novel global convergence algorithm: bee col-
Dakuo H, Fuli W, Zhizhong M (2008b) A hybrid genetic algorithm lecting pollen algorithm. In: Advanced intelligent computing
approach based on differential evolution for economic dispatch theories and applications. With aspects of artificial intelligence.
with valve-point effect. Electr Power Energy Syst 30:31–38 Springer, pp 518–525
Devi AL, Krishna OV (2008) Combined economic and emission dis- Maity D et al (2016) Implementation of quassi-oppositional TLBO
patch using evolutionary algorithms—a case study. ARPN J Eng technique on economic load dispatch problem considering various
Appl Sci 3(6):28–35 generator constraints. Electrical Energy Systems (ICEES), 2016
Dhillon JS, Kothari DP (2010) Power system optimization, 2nd edn. 3rd International Conference on IEEE, 2016
Prentice Hall India, New Delhi Mirjalili S (2015a) Moth-flame optimization algorithm: a novel nature
dos Santos Coelho L, Lee CS (2008) Solving economic load dispatch inspired heuristic paradigm. Knowl Based Syst. https://doi.
problems in power systems using chaotic and Gaussian particle org/10.1016/j.knosys.2015.07.006
swarm optimization approaches. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst Mirjalili Seyedali (2015b) Dragonfly algorithm: a new meta-heuristic
30(5):297–307 optimization technique for solving single-objective, discrete,
Dubey HM, Manjaree P, Panigrahi BK, Udgir M (2013) Economic load and multi-objective problems. Neural Comput Appl. https://doi.
dispatch by hybrid swarm intelligence based gravitational search org/10.1007/s00521-015-1920-1
algorithm. Int J Intell Syst Appl (Ijisa) 5(8):21–32 Mirjalili Seyedali, Lewis Andrew (2014) Adaptive gbest-
Duman S, Güvenç U, Yörükeren N (2010) Gravitational search algo- guided gravitational search algorithm. Neural Comput Appl
rithm for economic dispatch with valve-point effects. Int Rev 25(7–8):1569–1584
Electr Eng 5(6):2890–2895 Mirjalili S, Mirjalili SM, Lewis A (2014) Grey wolf optimizer. Adv
Gaing Z-L (2003) Particle swarm optimization to solving the economic Eng Softw 69:46–61
dispatch considering the generator constraints. Power Syst IEEE Mirjalili S, Mirjalili SM, Hatamlou A (2015) Multi-verse optimizer: a
Trans 18(3):1187–1195 nature-inspired algorithm for global optimization. Neural Comput
Gandomi AH, Alavi AH (2012) Krill Herd: a new bio-inspired opti- Appl. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-015-1870-7
mization algorithm. Communications in nonlinear science and Mondal A et al (2016) Solving of economic load dispatch problem
numerical simulation with generator constraints using ITLBO technique. In: Electrical,
123
INAE Letters
electronics and computer science (SCEECS), 2016 IEEE Stu- Selvakumar AI, Thanushkodi K (2007) A new particle swarm optimi-
dents’ Conference on IEEE, 2016 zation solution to nonconvex economic dispatch problems. IEEE
Moradi M, Badri A, Ghandehari R (2016) Non-convex constrained Trans Power Syst 22(1):42–51
economic dispatch with valve point loading effect using a grey Selvakumar AI, Thanushkodi K (2008) Anti-predatory particle swarm
wolf optimizer algorithm. Thermal Power Plants (CTPP), 2016 optimization: solution to non-convex economic dispatch prob-
6th Conference on IEEE, 2016 lems. Electr Power Syst Res 78:2–10
Mucherino A, Seref O (2007) Monkey search: a novel metaheuristic Sharma U, Moses B (2016) Analysis and optimization of economic
search for global optimization. In: AIP conference proceedings, load dispatch using soft computing techniques. In: Electrical,
p 162 electronics, and optimization techniques (ICEEOT), International
Niknam T (2010) A new fuzzy adaptive hybrid particle swarm opti- Conference on IEEE, 2016
mization algorithm for non-linear, non-smooth and non-convex Shiqin Y, Jianjun J, Guangxing Y (2009) A dolphin partner optimiza-
economic dispatch problem. Appl Energy 87(1):327–339 tion. In: intelligent systems, 2009. GCIS’09. WRI Global Con-
Pan W-T (2012) A new fruit fly optimization algorithm: taking the gress, pp. 124–128
financial distress model as an example. Knowl Based Syst Singh L, Dhillon JS (2009) Cardinal priority ranking based decision
26:69–74 making for economic-emission dispatch problem. Int J Eng Sci
Pandi VR, Panigrahi BK (2011) Dynamic economic load dispatch Technol 1(1):272–282
using hybrid swarm intelligence based harmony search algorithm. Sinha N, Chakrabarti V, Chattopadhyay PK (2003a) Evolutionary pro-
Expert Syst Appl 38(7):8509–8514 gramming techniques for economic load dispatch. Evol Comput
Panigrahi BK, Pandi VR (2008) Bacterial foraging optimization: IEEE Trans 7(1):83–94
Nelder–Mead hybrid algorithm for economic load dispatch. IET Sinha N, Chakrabati R, Chattopadhyay PK (2003b) Evolutionary pro-
Gener Transm Distrib 2(4):556–565 gramming techniques for economic load dispatch. IEEE Trans
Park JB, Lee KS, Shin JR, Lee KY (2005) A particle swarm optimiza- Evol Comput 7(1):83–94
tion for economic dispatch with nonsmooth cost functions. IEEE Swain RK, Sahu NC, Hota PK (2012) Gravitational search algorithm
Trans Power Syst 20(1):34–42 for optimal economic dispatch. Proc Technol 6:411–419
Park J-B et al (2010) An improved particle swarm optimization for Thao NTP, Thang NT (2014) Environmental economic load dispatch
nonconvex economic dispatch problems. IEEE Trans Power Syst with quadratic fuel cost function using cuckoo search algorithm.
25(1):156–166 Int J u-and e-Serv Sci Technol 7(2):199–210
Pereira-Neto A, Unsihuay C, Saavedra OR (2005) Efficient evolu- Tiwari A, Manjaree P (2016) Bid based economic load dispatch using
tionary strategy optimization procedure to solve the nonconvex symbiotic organisms search algorithm. In: Engineering and tech-
economic dispatch problem with generator constraints. IEE Proc nology (ICETECH), 2016 IEEE International Conference on
Gener Transm Distrib 152(5):653–660 IEEE, 2016
Pinto PC, Runkler TA, Sousa JMC (2007) Wasp swarm algorithm for Victoire TAA, Jeyakumar AE (2004) Hybrid PSO-SQP for eco-
dynamic MAX-SAT problems. In: International conference on nomic dispatch with valve-point effect. Electr Power Syst Res
adaptive and natural computing algorithms, Springer, Berlin, Hei- 71(1):51–59
delberg, pp 350–357 Victorie TAA, Jeyakumar AE (2004) Hybrid PSO-SQP for economic
Pothiya S, Ngamroo I, Kongprawechnon W (2010) Ant colony opti- dispatch with valve-point effect. Electr Power Syst Res 71:51–59
misation for economic dispatch problem with non-smooth cost Vlachogiannis JG, Lee KY (2009) Economic load dispatch—a compar-
functions. Electr Power Energy Syst 32:478–487 ative study on heuristic optimization techniques with an improved
Rahmat NA, Musirin I, Abidin AF (2014) Differential evolution immu- coordinated aggregation-based PSO. IEEE Trans Power Syst
nized ant colony optimization (DEIANT) technique in solving 24(2):991–1001
weighted economic load dispatch problem. Asian Bull Eng Sci Walters DC, Sheble GB (1993) Genetic algorithm solution of eco-
Technol 1(1):17–26 nomic dispatch with valve point loading. IEEE Trans Power Syst
Rajasomashekar S, Aravindhababu P (2012) Biogeography based opti- 8(3):1325–1332
mization technique for best compromise solution of economic Wang L, Li L-p (2013) An effective differential harmony search algo-
emission dispatch. Swarm Evol Comput 7:47–57 rithm for the solving non-convex economic load dispatch prob-
Ravi CN, Christober Asir Rajan C (2013) Differential evolution tech- lems. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 44(1):832–843
nique to solve combined economic emission dispatch. In: 3rd Wang S-K, Chiou J-P, Liu C-W (2007) Nonsmooth/non-convex eco-
international conference on electronics, biomedical engineering nomic dispatch by a novel hybrid differential evolution algorithm.
and its applications (ICEBEA’2013), pp. 26–27 IET Gener Transm Distrib 1(5):793–803
Rayapudi SR (2011) An intelligent water drop algorithm for solv- Yang X-S (2010) Firefly algorithm, stochastic test functions and design
ing economic load dispatch problem. Int J Electr Electron Eng optimisation. Int J Bio Inspired Comput 2:78–84
5(2):43–49 Yang X-S, Deb S (2009) Cuckoo search via Lévy flights. In: Nature and
Reddy AS, Vaisakh K (2014) Shuffled differential evolution for large biologically inspired computing. NaBIC 2009. World Congress,
scale economic dispatch. Electr Power Syst Res 96:237–245 pp 210–214
Saxena N, Ganguli S (2015) Solar and wind power estimation and Yang X-S, Hosseini SSS, Gandomi AH (2012) Firefly algorithm for
economic load dispatch using firefly algorithm. Proc Comput Sci solving non-convex economic dispatch problems with valve load-
70:688–700 ing effect. Applied Soft Computing 12(3):1180–1186
Secui DC, Bendea G, Cristina H (2014) A modified harmony search
algorithm for the economic dispatch problem. Stud Inf Control
23(2):143–152
123