electronics

Review
Modeling and Formulation of Optimization Problems for
Optimal Scheduling of Multi-Generation and Hybrid Energy
Systems: Review and Recommendations
Sheroze Liaquat 1 , Muhammad Fahad Zia 1,2 and Mohamed Benbouzid 2,3, *

1 Department of Electrical Engineering, National University of Computer and Emerging Sciences,

Lahore 54000, Pakistan; shahroze.liaquat@nu.edu.pk (S.L.); fahad.zia@nu.edu.pk (M.F.Z.)
2 Institut de Recherche Dupuy de Lôme (UMR CNRS 60 27 IRDL), University of Brest, 29238 Brest, France
3 Logistics Engineering College, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai 201306, China
* Correspondence: mohamed.benbouzid@univ-brest.fr

Abstract: Increasing power demands require multiple generating units interconnected with each
other to maintain the power balance of the system. This results in a highly dense power system
consisting of multiple generating units which coordinate with each other to maintain the balanced
performance of the system. Among different energy sources, the thermal source, the hydro energy
source, the photovoltaic system, and the wind energy source are the most popular ones. Researchers
have developed several optimization problems in the literature known as dispatch problems to model



the system consisting of these different types of energy sources. The constraints for each system


depend upon the generation type and the nature of the objective functions involved. This paper pro-
Citation: Liaquat, S.; Zia, M.F.; vides a state-of-the-art review of different dispatch problems and the nature of the objective functions
Benbouzid, M. Modeling and
involved in them and highlights the major constraints associated with each optimization function.
Formulation of Optimization
Problems for Optimal Scheduling of
Keywords: economic dispatch; hydrothermal scheduling; photovoltaic energy system; wind energy
Multi-Generation and Hybrid Energy
system; combined economic emission dispatch; forecasting
Systems: Review and
Recommendations. Electronics 2021,
10, 1688. https://doi.org/10.3390/
electronics10141688
1. Introduction
Academic Editors: Giambattista With the increase in energy demand and its impact on economic advancement, several
Gruosso and Nicu Bizon generating sources are currently included in the conventional grid to maintain the power
balance of the system [1–3]. In such a dense power system, the major challenge is to opti-
Received: 27 May 2021 mally control different energy sources while preserving the different energy constraints of
Accepted: 10 July 2021 the system [4–6]. This constitutes a highly non-linear and multi-dimensional optimization
Published: 14 July 2021 problem in the literature which aims to find the optimal operating point for the system
while taking into account the various system constraints [7,8]. The nature of the objective
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral function and the different types of generation constraints depend upon the nature of the
with regard to jurisdictional claims in dispatch problem. Figure 1 shows the breakdown of different optimization problems which
published maps and institutional affil-
can be formulated from the dispatch of different generation sources. To summarize Figure 1,
iations.
the three major categories of dispatch problems primarily followed by researchers in the
literature to describe the optimum conditions for hybrid power systems are as follows:
• The economic dispatch (ED) problem for multiple thermal units having different
quadratic cost characteristics. The ED problem is further classified as: (a) the inclusion
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
of the valve point effect loading for thermal units, also known as the ED problem with
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
valve point loading, and (b) the inclusion of the emission values for the thermal units
distributed under the terms and
known as the combined economic emission dispatch problem (CEEDP).
conditions of the Creative Commons • The optimization problem dealing with two major conventional sources, the hydroelec-
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// tric source and the thermal energy source. Such a problem is termed the hydrothermal
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ scheduling (HTS) problem. The problem is then modified to STHTS and LTHTS
4.0/). depending upon the duration of the scheduling problem.

Electronics 2021, 10, 1688. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics10141688 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/electronics

Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 2 of 28

• The dispatch problem concerned with the hybrid energy systems consisting of con-
ventional and renewable energy sources. The sources used in addition to the hydro
and thermal units are PV source, WES, and BESS.
Economic dispatch with
Economic disptach for valve point loading
multiple thermal units
Combined economic emission
dispatch with emission constraints

Short term hydrothermal scheduling

General breakdown of
different dispatch Economic disptach for
Pumped hydrothermal scheduling
hydro and thermal units
problems in Literature
Cascaded reservoir hydrothermal
scheduling

Dispatch of thermal, wind and solar

energy sources
Economic disptach of
Dispatch of hydro, wind and solar
coventional and non- energy sources
conventional source
Dispatch of hydro, thermal, wind,
solar, and ESS

Figure 1. Brief overview of the breakdown of different types of optimization problems based on the
economic dispatch of multiple generation sources.

The next part of the Introduction provides a brief outline of each type of dispatch
problem given in Figure 1.

1.1. Overview of Economic Dispatch Problem for Multi-Thermal System

The most simple case involves the optimum dispatch of several thermal units having
different cost characteristics. Such a problem, which purely deals with the dispatch of the
thermal units, is described as the economic dispatch (ED) problem for the thermal units in
the literature [9,10]. The possible constraints involved in such a problem are power balance,
power limits, ramp limits constraints, and spinning reserve constraints [11,12]. The different
types of problems are then derived based on the modifications in the conventional objective
function of the ED problem. One such modification is the inclusion of the valve point
effect in the quadratic cost equation of the thermal units to practically model the cost
characteristics of each thermal unit [13,14]. The valve point effect results in an additional
sinusoidal term in the quadratic cost equation of thermal units which makes the objective
function highly non-linear and non-convex. The constraints defined for the ED problem
having valve point loading are the same in most of the literature as defined for the simple
quadratic-based dispatch problem. Another modification suggested while including the
valve point effect is to consider the emission constraints of the thermal units. For such
a problem, the two objective functions are defined which simultaneously reduce the
thermal and emission cost for the system. This constitutes a multi-objective optimization
problem and is termed the combined economic emission dispatch problem (CEEDP) in the
literature [15,16]. The two constraints defined for the conventional CEEDP are the power
balance constraint and the power limits constraint.

1.2. Overview of Hydrothermal Scheduling Problem

To reduce the emission constraints and the dependence on the thermal units, re-
searchers have developed another optimization problem which deals with the combined
optimum dispatch of two major conventional sources, the hydroelectric source and the ther-
mal energy source. The main objective of such a problem is to reduce the thermal cost of the
system while preserving the reservoir and generation constraints for the hydro and thermal
units. Such a problem is termed the short term hydrothermal scheduling (STHTS) problem
in the literature [17,18]. The conventional STHTS problem has been extended to include
multiple reservoirs connected in a cascaded connection. Such a configuration constitutes an
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 3 of 28

optimization problem termed the cascaded short term hydrothermal scheduling (CSTHTS)
problem [19,20]. Another modification suggested in the hydrothermal scheduling prob-
lem is to increase the duration of the scheduling time over which different conventional
sources are optimally coordinated with each other to meet the demand value. This consti-
tutes an optimization problem termed the long term hydrothermal scheduling (LTHTS)
problem [21,22].

1.3. Overview of ED Problem for Hybrid Energy Systems

In recent decades, with the increase in penetration of distributed generation sources
to the conventional grid, a large set of optimization problems has been derived based on
the economic dispatch of conventional and non-conventional energy sources. Such prob-
lems usually deal with the dispatch of hybrid energy systems which include photovoltaic
(PV) energy sources, wind energy systems, and battery energy storage systems (BESS), in
addition to thermal and hydroelectric sources [23–25]. The majority of these suggested
problems deal with the intermittent and variable nature of the renewable energy sources
coupled with the addition of certain constraints related to each distributed energy source.
The novelties introduced by the researchers related to the combined dispatch of conven-
tional and non-conventional sources were based on the different forecasting techniques
and uncertainty analysis of the renewable energy sources [26–29].

1.4. Literature Survey of Review Papers

After highlighting the major types of optimization problems dealing with different
energy sources, the next major part of the literature constitutes the set of optimization
algorithms used to solve these functions. A large number of research papers have been
published over the years on these different types of algorithms and their variants to find
the optimum solution of each objective function. These algorithms are either based on a set
of well-defined deterministic rules [30–33] or include some random movement criteria to
reduce the computational effort for finding the global solution of large scale practical prob-
lems [17,18,34,35]. Among these different algorithms, a promising category of algorithms
which depend upon the nature-inspired phenomenon is that of the meta-heuristic optimiza-
tion algorithm. The major advantages of such algorithms are their reduced computational
efficiency and complexity in reaching towards the optimum solution for large scale power
optimization problems [36–39]. This constitutes a vast literature which covers different
aspects related to either the novelties in the dispatch problem or the implementation of
novel optimization algorithms for solving such problems. To summarize all these research
directions, researchers have recently published some review papers on the individual
aspects of each optimization problem. The authors in [40] have discussed the earlier forms
of the economic dispatch problem. Their focus was primarily centered around the optimal
power flow (OPF) and automatic generation control (AGC) for the ED problem. The au-
thors in [41] have discussed the particle swarm optimization (PSO) on the conventional
non-linear dispatch problem. The authors in [42,43] have discussed the economic dispatch
with the WES and electric vehicles. The authors in [44,45] have discussed different types of
optimization algorithms for CEEDP. Table 1 summarizes different review papers related
to this particular problem. These papers mostly address thermal units while considering
renewable energy sources and emission constraints. In most of the mentioned review
papers, the main objective of the authors was to compare different sets of optimization
algorithms for a particular optimization problem. A comprehensive review addressing
different types of dispatch problems was not considered by researchers to much of an
extent in the literature.
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 4 of 28

Table 1. Brief summary and analysis of different review papers published on various types of economic dispatch problems.

Reference Test System Major Contributions Shortcomings of Review

Review of economic dispatch The constraints for conven-
Economic dispatch consid- tional and non-conventional
Chowdhury et al. [40] problems while considering
ering non-conventional en- energy sources are not ad-
ergy sources the optimal power flow and
automatic generation control dressed elaborately while
for thermal units defining the objective func-
tions
Review of the different vari- Various forms of dispatch
Amita et al. [41] Economic emission dispatch ants of particle swarm opti- problems, including the dis-
for thermal generators mization algorithm for multi- tributed energy sources, are
objective economic emission not elaborated upon while dis-
dispatch cussing the application of the
optimization algorithm
Review of dispatch problems The forecasting algorithms to
Economic dispatch under the including the wind source handle the variable nature
Ren et al. [42] of the wind energy system
penetration of the wind en- while developing the opti-
ergy source mization algorithms to han- are not discussed extensively.
dle the intermittent nature Moreover, sources like hydro
of WES and performing risk and PV systems are not dis-
management cussed while modeling the ob-
jective function
Review of the optimization The mathematical models
Economic dispatch of plug-in and the constraints associated
Peng et al. [43] algorithms for combined dis- with the renewable energy
electric vehicles patch of plug-in electric ve- systems are not elaborated
hicles and distributed en- upon in an extensive manner
ergy sources while defining the objective
function
The dispatch problems for
Review of different conven-
Multi-objective economic tional, heuristic, and hy- the non-conventional energy
Fahad et al. [44]
emission dispatch for ther- brid optimization algorithms sources are not discussed
mal units while analyzing different opti-
for combined economic emis-
sion dispatch mization algorithms for com-
bined economic emission dis-
patch
The dispatch problems for
Multi-objective economic Review of different heuristic the non-conventional energy
Tapas et al. [45] optimization algorithms and
emission dispatch for ther- sources are not discussed
mal units their variants for combined while analyzing different opti-
economic emission dispatch mization algorithms for com-
bined economic emission dis-
patch
Review of the different heuris- The renewable energy sources
Economic dispatch of power such as wind and photo-
Nazari-Heris et al. [46] tic optimization algorithms
system consisting of hydro voltaic energy sources are not
and thermal units for system consisting of multi-
ple thermal and hydro units discussed while defining the
optimization problem
Study of hydrothermal
Multi-carrier energy sys- scheduling problem along The renewable energy sources
Nazari-Heris et al. [47] tems consisting of gas-, are generally not considered
with the planning of pumped
electricity-, and water-based hydro units. The integration while defining the optimiza-
energy sources of different electric-, water-, tion problem
and gas-based energy sources
is also discussed extensively
Review of different heuristic Statistical analysis of different
Combined heat and power and meta-heuristic optimiza-
Nazari-Heris et al. [48] algorithms can be discussed
economic dispatch (CHPED) tion algorithms for CHPED to better compare the perfor-
for 5 different test systems problem while considering mance of heuristic techniques
valve point loading and trans- for CHPED problem
mission losses of the system
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 5 of 28

2. Motivation and Major Contributions of Review

Although the literature has discussed some aspects of the dispatch problem in different
places, a comprehensive overview of all the major types of dispatch problems along with
the nature of the objective functions has not been presented comprehensively in a single
place. Based on these shortcomings of the literature, the major contributions of this review
paper are as follows:
1. It presents major types of dispatch problems in the literature and discusses the
different objective functions involved in each problem. It also discusses their various
forms and presents the updated constraints and the objective functions.
2. It discusses the nature of the objective functions involved in each dispatch problem.
It highlights major decision variables and gives suggestions for updating the problem.
3. It proposes improvements for the current forms of typical ED problems and suggests
modifications to better formulate the objective function.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section 3 gives the overview of
different dispatch problems for systems having multiple thermal units. Section 4 gives the
overview of dispatch problems for hydro and thermal units. Section 5 gives the overview of
the dispatch problems of the system including both conventional and distributed generation
sources. Section 6 gives a brief overview of different methods used in the literature to solve
dispatch problems. Section 7 gives remarks and future directions for different dispatch
problems along with the conclusions.

3. Economic Dispatch Problem for Thermal Units

The simplest type of dispatch problem involves the optimum solution of generators
consisting of multiple thermal units. The main objective function used in the ED problem
aims to minimize the total thermal generation cost [49–52] and is given as follows:

Ng
Ct = ∑ Fi ( PT,i ) ($/hr ) (1)
i =1

where Ct represents the total thermal cost of the system, Ng represents the total number
of thermal generators, and Fi ( PT,i ) represents the cost function of a particular generator i.
The cost characteristics are usually given by the quadratic function as follows:
2
Fi ( PT,i ) = αi + β i PT,i + γi PT,i (2)

where αi , β i , and γi are the cost coefficients of a particular generator i. The constraints
involved in the classical ED problem for thermal units are given as follows:
 N
g
∑i=1 PT,i = PD + PL



 PT,i,min ≤ PT,i ≤ PT,i,max



o o

max( PT,i,min , PT,i − DRi ) ≤ PT,i ≤ min( PT,i,max , PT,i + URi )



Ng
 ∑i=1 PT,i,max ≥ PD + Rs (3)
L

 PT,i,min ≤ PT,i ≤ PT,i,1



 

U
PT,i ∈ PT,i,m L
−1 ≤ PT,i ≤ PT,i,m ( m = 2, 3, ...., Nzi )




 
 U
PT,i,N ≤ PT,i ≤ Pi,max (m = Nzi )


zi

The first constraint describes the power balance of the system which states that the
total output generation must be equal to the load demand PD and the transmission losses
PL . The second constraint defines that the output of the i generator must be within the
maximum PT,i,max and minimum PT,i,min thermal limits. The third constraint defines the
ramp up URi and ramp down DRi limits for the i generator. This particular constraint
o can be increased or
defines a threshold by which the previous output of the i generator PT,i
decreased. The fourth constraint describes the spinning reserve Rs factor for the thermal
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 6 of 28

generators. The fifth constraint describes the prohibited operating zones (POZ) constraint
U
for the generators. PT,i,m L
and PT,i,m describe the upper and lower limits for POZ. Nzi shows
the total number of POZ. The POZ constraint introduces non-linearity and discontinuities
in the original quadratic cost equation due to different practical constraints such as the
failure of the machine or shaft tremor [53–55].

3.1. Economic Dispatch for Thermal Units including Valve Point Loading
The quadratic cost equation defined in the previous dispatch problem does not con-
sider the valve point loading on the characteristics curve. To model the cost curve of the
thermal generation while considering the effect of the opening and closing of steam valves,
researchers have suggested an additional sinusoidal term in the conventional cost equation
of the thermal generators [56–61]. The cost characteristics for thermal generation having
valve point loading are given as follows:
2
Fi ( PT,i ) = αi + β i PT,i + γi PT,i + |ei sin( f i ( PT,i,min − PT,i ))| (4)

where αi , β i , γi , ei and f i represent the cost coefficients for the thermal generator while
considering the valve point loading effect. For a system having multiple fuels, the cost
characteristics for each generator while considering the valve point effect can be written
as follows:

2 + | e sin ( f ( P



α1 + β 1 PT,1 + γ1 PT,1 1 1 T,1,min − PT,1 ))|
2 + | e sin ( f ( P
+ P + P 2 T,2,min − PT,2 ))|



 α 2 β 2 T,2 γ2 T,2 2

α + β P + γ P2 + |e sin( f ( P
3 T,3,min − PT,3 ))|

3 3 T,3 3 T,3 3
= (5)

 .




 .

2
Ng T,Ng + γ Ng PT,Ng + | e Ng sin ( f Ng ( PT,Ng ,min − PT,Ng ))|

α + β P
Ng

Figure 2 shows the effect of the valve point loading on the cost characteristics of the
thermal generation. It is evident that the characteristics become highly non-linear and
non-smooth in nature by including an additional term in the cost characteristics of the
thermal generators.

Normal quadratic curve without valve point loading

Valve point loading effect

Fuel Cost ($\hr)

PT,min Output power (MW) PT,max

Figure 2. Comparison of the cost characteristics of thermal generators with and without valve point
loading effect. The characteristics become non-smooth and contain bumps when the valve point
loading is considered for thermal generators.
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 7 of 28

The constraints defined for the ED problem while considering the valve point loading
are same as defined for the quadratic cost characteristics. However, the only up gradation
is in the objective function of the ED problem, which makes the optimization problem
non-linear and non-convex in nature.

3.2. Economic Dispatch Problem for Thermal Units including Emission Constraints
The thermal generator has certain environmental constraints and can result in emission
values which can have adverse effects on the atmosphere. To consider the emission values
of the thermal generation, researchers have suggested a multi-objective optimization
problem to simultaneously optimize both cost and emission values of thermal generation,
which formulates a combined economic-emission dispatch problem [62–66]. The two
main objectives involved in the CEEDP are the total thermal cost of the system and the
emission values of the thermal generation. The thermal cost is given in accordance with
the previously defined cost characteristics and is given as follows:
( Ng 2 + | e sin ( f ( P
∑i=1 αi + β i PT,i + γi PT,i i i T,i,min − PT,i ))| Valve Point Loading
F ( PT,i ) = Ng 2
∑i=1 αi + β i PT,i + γi PT,i Without Valve Point Loading
(6)
The second main objective of the CEEDP deals with the emission values computed as
the function of the thermal power. The cost function for the emission of thermal units is
given as follows:

Ng
E( PT,i ) = ∑ [ai + bi PT,i + ci PT,i
2
+ µi exp(λi PT,i )] (7)
i =1

where ai , bi , ci , µi and λi represent the emission coefficients of the i thermal generator.

The overall objective function deals with the minimization of both thermal cost and the
emission values of the generators [67,68] and is mathematically given as follows:

FF ( PT,i ) = min[ F ( PT,i ), E( PT,i )] (8)

There are two constraints involved in a typical CEEDP, the power balance constraint
and the power limits constraint [69,70]. These constraints are in accordance with the
previously defined constraints for the simple ED problem and are given as follows:
Ng
(
∑i=1 PT,i = PD + PL
= (9)
PT,i,min ≤ PT,i ≤ PT,i,max

Power losses in the CEEDP play an important role in formulating a realistic approach
towards modeling a power system. There are several methods proposed by researchers to
model transmission line losses of the system. The simplest involves the weighted sum of
the quadratic contribution of each thermal power given as follows:

Ng
PL = ∑ δi PT,i
2
(10)
i =1

where δi represents the loss coefficients. Equation (10) is generally used for small scale
power systems having a lesser number of thermal generating units (three-generating-unit
system). Another quadratic relation used to evaluate the transmission line losses for large
scale power systems is given as follows:

Ng Ng
PL = ∑ ∑ PT,i Bij PT,j (11)
i =1 j =1
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 8 of 28

To better model transmission line losses of large scale power systems, Kron’s loss
formula including a quadratic, linear, and constant term [71,72] is given as follows:

Ng Ng Ng
PL = ∑ ∑ PT,i Bij PT,j + ∑ Bi0 PT,i + B00 (12)
i =1 j =1 i =1

where Bij , Bi0 and B00 are the loss coefficients for modeling the transmission line losses.
The coefficients Bij , Bi0 , and B00 are important for modeling the line losses of the system.
These constants primarily depend upon the configuration of the power system and number
of generating units. Table 2 summarizes the loss coefficients for power systems having a
different number of generating units.

Table 2. Summary of loss coefficients for power systems having different number of thermal generating units [71,72].

Test System Loss Coefficients

1 2 3 - - - - - - -
Power system with δ1x3 2.18 2.28 1.79
- - - - - - -
3 thermal units × 10−4 × 10−4 × 10−4
B6x6 1 2 3 4 5 6 - - - -
1 1.4 × 10−4 1.7 × 10−5 1.5 × 10−5 1.9 × 10−5 2.6 × 10−5 2.2 × 10−5 - - - -
2 1.7 × 10−5 6.0 × 10−5 1.3 × 10−5 1.6 × 10−5 1.5 × 10−5 2.0 × 10−5 - - - -
Power system with 3 1.5 × 10−5 1.3 × 10−5 6.5 × 10−5 1.7 × 10−5 2.4 × 10−5 1.9 × 10−5 - - - -
6 thermal units 4 1.9 × 10−5 1.6 × 10−5 1.7 × 10−5 7.1 × 10−5 3.0 × 10−5 2.5 × 10−5 - - - -
5 2.6 × 10−5 1.5 × 10−5 2.4 × 10−5 3.0 × 10−5 6.9 × 10−5 3.2 × 10−5 - - - -
6 2.2 × 10−5 2.0 × 10−5 1.9 × 10−5 2.5 × 10−5 3.2 × 10−5 8.5 × 10−5 - - - -
B0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - - - -
B00 0 - - - - - - - - -
B10x10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1.7 1.8 1.9 2.0
1 4.9 × 10−5 1.4 × 10−5 1.5 × 10−5 1.5 × 10−5 1.6 × 10−5 1.7 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5
1.5 1.6 1.8 1.8
2 1.4 × 10−5 4.5 × 10−5 1.6 × 10−5 1.6 × 10−5 1.7 × 10−5 1.5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5
1.4 1.4 1.6 1.6
3 1.5 × 10−5 1.6 × 10−5 3.9 × 10−5 1.0 × 10−5 1.2 × 10−5 1.2 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5
1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5
4 1.5 × 10−5 1.6 × 10−5 1.0 × 10−5 4.0 × 10−5 1.4 × 10−5 1.0 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5
Power system with 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.6
5 1.6 × 10−5 1.7 × 10−5 1.2 × 10−5 1.4 × 10−5 3.5 × 10−5 1.1 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5
10 thermal units 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.5
6 1.7 × 10−5 1.5 × 10−5 1.2 × 10−5 1.0 × 10−5 1.1 × 10−5 3.6 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5
3.8 1.6 1.6 1.8
7 1.7 × 10−5 1.5 × 10−5 1.4 × 10−5 1.1 × 10−5 1.3 × 10−5 1.2 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5
1.6 4.0 1.5 1.6
8 1.8 × 10−5 1.6 × 10−5 1.4 × 10−5 1.2 × 10−5 1.3 × 10−5 1.2 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5
1.6 1.5 4.2 1.9
9 1.9 × 10−5 1.8 × 10−5 1.6 × 10−5 1.4 × 10−5 1.5 × 10−5 1.4 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5
1.8 1.6 1.9 4.4
10 2.0 × 10−5 1.8 × 10−5 1.6 × 10−5 1.5 × 10−5 1.6 × 10−5 1.5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5 × 10−5
B0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
B00 0 - - - - - - - - -

To solve the multi-objective economic emission dispatch problem dealing with both
objective functions, the authors have discussed two main methods to compute the optimal
solution. The first method combines two objective functions and takes the weighted sum
by assigning a scaling factor for the emission values. In this case, the overall objective
function can be written as follows:

FF ( PT,i ) = δF + w(1 − δ) E (13)

In the above equation, F and E represent the cost and emission objective functions,
respectively. δ represents the priority weight for each objective function. The value of δ is
in the range [0,1]. w represents the scaling factor. The value of δ is important for controlling
the contribution of each objective function. For δ = 1, the problem is reduced to the simple
ED problem, having only thermal cost as the objective function. For δ = 0, the problem
only deals with the emission objective function. If we increase the value of δ in the above
equation, the objective function will give more priority to the thermal cost, and hence the
optimum solution found will give a lower thermal cost at the expense of more emission
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 9 of 28

values. The selection of δ largely depends upon the nature of the problem and the desired
values for each of the individual objective functions [73].
Another technique adopted by the authors in the literature to visualize the multi-
objective CEEDP is to compute the Pareto front for the problem. The graph between the
emission values and the total cost is computed over the range of the decision variables,
and the best compromise solution is obtained. The Pareto optimal point in this case
would describe a situation where any attempt to improve an individual objective function
would degrade the performance of the second objective function. This is an efficient
method suggested by researchers to visualize the CEEDP and understand the nature of two
objective functions [74–76]. Table 3 shows the summary of the ED problems for multiple
thermal units.

Table 3. Summary of different types of ED problems involving only thermal units as generating source. The nature of the
optimization problem and the decision variables are highlighted for each type.

Optimization Objective Constraints

Decision Nature of Objective
Problem Function Variables Function
The objective function
Economic dispatch Power balance constraint, is non-linear and multi-
Ng power limits constraint, dimensional in nature.
problem for multi- Ct = ∑i=1 Fi ( PT,i ) ($/hr ) PT
ple thermal units prohibited operating zones The cost curve is smooth
constraint, reserve con- over the range of deci-
having different cost
straint, and ramp limits sion variables. However,
characteristics [49–55] constraint the addition of prohib-
ited operating zones in-
troduces discontinuity in
the curve
The objective function
Economic dispatch prob- Ng Power balance constraint, is non-linear and multi-
Ct = ∑i=1 [αi + β i PT,i + power limits constraint, PT
lem for multiple thermal 2 + | e sin ( f ( P
dimensional in nature.
γi PT,i i i T,i,min − prohibited operating zones The addition of the valve
considering valve point constraint, reserve con-
loading [56–61] PT,i ))|] ($/hr ) point loading introduces
straint, and ramp limits bumps on the smooth
constraint
cost equation for the ther-
mal generation
The optimization prob-
Economic dispatch prob- lem is a multi-objective
min[ F ( PT,i ), E( PT,i )] Power balance constraint PT
lem for multiple thermal and power limits con- problem. Both objective
considering emission straint functions are non-linear
constraints [62–76] and multi-dimensional
in nature. Weighting
factors and Pareto fronts
are used to solve the
combined problem

4. Economic Dispatch Problem for Thermal and Hydro Units

Another abundantly used conventional energy source to fulfill the load demand over
the scheduling period is the hydroelectric energy source. The power system consisting
of both thermal and hydro units gives rise to another interesting optimization problem
which aims to reduce the thermal cost of the system while maintaining certain levels of
the reservoir [77–79]. The cost of the generation of hydro power is usually not included
in the objective function due to the negligible running cost of hydro units as compared
to thermal generators [80–82]. In this section, we will highlight some major forms of the
dispatch problem including hydro and thermal units.

4.1. Scheduling Problem of Single Thermal and Hydro Unit

The simplest form of the hydrothermal scheduling problem involves the optimum
dispatch of a single equivalent thermal unit and a hydro energy source [83,84]. Figure 3
shows the equivalent block diagram for a hydrothermal scheduling problem while con-
sidering the transmission line losses. The objective function in this case can be written as
follows [85,86]:
ns
f = ∑ Ni F( PT ) ($) (14)
i =1

where Nj represents the total duration of each scheduling interval, and ns represents the
total number of scheduling intervals. F ( PT ) represents the cost function for the thermal unit
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 10 of 28

which is equal to the previously defined characteristics for the ED of multiple thermal units.
If the length of Nj spans over few days, it can be categorized as the short term scheduling
problem. The above objective function sums the total cost of the thermal generation over
each scheduling interval. In simple dispatch problems for thermal units, the length of the
scheduling interval is not usually considered, and we have static load demand which must
be fulfilled by the optimal contribution of different thermal units in the system. However,
in the case of hydrothermal scheduling, the length of the scheduling interval plays an
important role. The entire scheduling period is divided into different intervals ns (usually
of the same length), and the load demand varies for each interval [87,88]. The optimal
contribution of thermal and hydro units changes for each interval depending upon the
demand value and the remaining generation constraints. Another important aspect of the
objective function defined above is the unit of the function. The function is expressed in $
instead of $/hr, since we are considering the duration of each scheduling interval Ni while
computing the thermal cost [89,90]. The constraints involved in the defined optimization
problem are as follows:
PT,i + PH,i = PD,i + PL,i (15)
PT,min ≤ PT,i ≤ PT,max (16)
PH,min ≤ PH,i ≤ PH,max (17)
Vmin ≤ Vi ≤ Vmax (18)
Vo = Vi (19)
V1 = Vf (20)
dmin,i ≤ di ≤ dmax,i (21)
ns
∑ Ni di = dT (22)
i =1

Vi = Vi−1 + Ni (in f i − di − spi ) (23)

where V, Vo , V1 , d, in f , and sp represent the volume, initial volume, final volume, discharge
rate, inflow, and spillage of the reservoir, respectively. Equation (15) represents the power
balance constraint. Equations (16) and (17) represent the power limits constraint for hydro
and thermal units. Equations (18)–(20) show the volume constraints for the hydro unit.
These constraints indicate that the volume for a particular scheduling interval i must be
with in the maximum Vmax and minimum Vmin limits. Moreover, the initial and final
values of the reservoir must be equal to defined the values of Vi and Vf to ensure the
proper storage of water in the reservoir. Equations (21) and (22) show the discharge rate
constraints. Equation (23) shows the equation of continuity which indicates the relation
between the volume values for two consecutive intervals i [91]. An important thing to note
is that the i represents a particular scheduling interval and not the index of a thermal or
hydro unit.
The next important step is to define the hydro and thermal equations. The normal
flow of the hydrothermal scheduling problem is to compute the discharge rate based
on the volume levels of the reservoir using the equation of continuity [92] as defined in
Equation (23). The hydro power is then defined as the function of the discharge rate given
as follows:
PH = func(d) (24)
The transmission line losses for the conventional hydrothermal scheduling problem
are modeled using only the hydro power, given as follows:

PL = func( PH ) (25)
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 11 of 28

Based on the hydro power and transmission losses, the thermal power can be com-
puted using the power balance equation defined in Equation (15). The objective function
can then be computed using the value of thermal power for each scheduling interval.

Water Thermal
inflow fuel

Generating Thermal
house power

PH PT

PH + PT = PD + PL
Figure 3. Block diagram representation for hydrothermal scheduling problem including single hydro and thermal unit.

4.2. Scheduling of Single Thermal and Multiple Hydro Units

Another common type of the dispatch problem deals with a power system consisting
of single thermal and multiple hydro units [93,94]. In such a problem, the hydro units
are connected in a cascade connection. The discharge of the upstream reservoir will be
added to the downstream reservoir with a certain time delay in the case of the cascaded
connection of the reservoirs [95,96]. Figure 4 shows the basic connection of the multiple
hydro units having reservoirs connected in a cascaded connection. It is evident from the
figure that the inflow of the downstream reservoir will be in accordance with the discharge
rate and the spillage of the upstream reservoir. In this particular case, separate inflow for
the downstream reservoirs is not considered.
The objective function in the case of the cascaded hydrothermal scheduling problem
can be given as follows [97,98]:
ns
f = ∑ Ni F( PT ) ($) (26)
i =1
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 12 of 28

subject to the following constraints:


G
 PT,i + ∑ j=1 PHj ,i = PD,i + PL,i



 PT,min ≤ PT,i ≤ PT,max




 PHj ,min ≤ PHj ,i ≤ PHj ,max



= Vjmin ≤ Vj,i ≤ Vjmax (27)

d jmin,i ≤ d j,i ≤ d jmax,i




n

∑i=s 1 Ni d j,i = d j,T




Ruj

j,i −1 + in f j,i − d j,i − sp j,i + ∑m=1 ( dm,i −τ + spm,i −τ )

V = V
j,i

inf1 sp1
Cascaded Connection of Reservoirs

sp2

d1

V1

sp3
d2
V2
V1i = V1i-1 + Ni (inf1i – sp1i – d1i)
V2i = V2i-1 + Ni (sp1i + d1i – sp2i – d2i)
V3i = V3i-1 + Ni (sp2i + d2i – sp3i – d3i) d3
V3

Figure 4. Block diagram representation for cascaded hydrothermal scheduling problem having
reservoirs connected in a cascade connection.

The objective function remains same for the cascaded problem and aims to minimize
the total generation cost of the equivalent thermal plant. The cost equation for the thermal
plant is again modeled using the conventional quadratic equation (and with the addition
of a sinusoidal term for valve point loading) with various cost coefficients. The updated
power balance equation takes into account the total hydro power contribution of all units
in addition to the thermal power while meeting the load demand and the transmission line
losses of the system. G represents the total number of hydro units [99,100]. τ represents
the time delay from the upstream reservoir m to the downstream reservoir j. Ruj shows
the total upstream reservoirs immediately located above the j plant. The equation of
continuity defined in the last constraint summarizes the volume of the j plant in terms
of its inflow, spillage, and discharge rate coupled with the parameters of the upstream
reservoirs. The hydro power of a particular unit j is defined in terms of its discharge rate.
The transmission losses of the network are modeled as the function of the hydro power for
a particular scheduling interval i [101–103].

4.3. Scheduling of Thermal Unit with Pumped Hydro Storage

Another important optimization problem which deals with the optimum dispatch of
the thermal and hydro unit is the pumped hydrothermal storage problem. In this type
of problem, the scheduling intervals are categorized into two major types, the off-peak
intervals in which the demand value of the system is low and the peak intervals in which
the demand is high. In off-peak intervals, the water is pumped back to the reservoir,
while in the peak intervals, the combined optimum dispatch of hydro and thermal units is
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 13 of 28

computed to meet the demand value [104,105]. The objective function aims to minimize
the total thermal cost generation, and it is given as follows:
ns
f = ∑ Ni F( PT ) ($) (28)
i =1

The constraints for the pumped hydrothermal storage are defined as follows:



 PT,min ≤ PT,i ≤ PT,max
PH,min ≤ PH,i ≤ PH,max






min ≤ Vi ≤ Vmax
V
= (29)
dmin,i ≤ di ≤ dmax,i


n
∑i=s 1 Ni di = d T





V = V + N (in f − d − sp )
i i −1 i i i i

The difference lies in the magnitude of the discharge rate d for the pumped hydrother-
mal storage problem. For off-peak intervals, where the water is pumped back to the
reservoir, the magnitude of the discharge rate is taken as negative. For non-pumping
intervals (peak intervals) or intervals where both the combined dispatch of hydro and
thermal units is determined, the magnitude of the discharge rate is taken as positive [106].
In the case of the pumped hydrothermal scheduling problem, the power balance equation
can be written as follows:
(
PD,g + PL,g − PT,g − PH,g = 0 ( Generating Intervals)
= (30)
PD,p + PL,p − PT,p + PH,p = 0 ( Pumped Intervals)

In the above equation, for generating intervals g, the combined dispatch of the hydro
power PH,g and thermal power PT,p is taken to meet the demand value and the transmis-
sion losses of the system. Figure 5 shows the equivalent circuit model of the pumped
hydrothermal model highlighting the power balance constraint equations for different
types of sub-intervals [107]. Table 4 summarizes the different dispatch problems for hydro
and thermal units.

Pumped
Thermal
Hydro
Unit
Unit

PH,g
PH,p PT,g

PD,g + PL,g – PT,g – PH,g = 0

PD,g + PL,g – PT,g + PH,p = 0 PD + PL

Figure 5. Equivalent circuit model of the pumped hydrothermal scheduling problem while consider-
ing the transmission losses of the system.
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 14 of 28

Table 4. Summary of different types of ED problems involving thermal unit and hydro unit as generating sources. The nature
of the optimization problem and the decision variables are highlighted for each type.

Optimization Objective Constraints

Decision Nature of Objective
Problem Function Variables Function

Power balance constraint, The objective func-

Economic dispatch prob- tion is non-linear and
f = ∑in=s 1 Ni F ( PT ) power limits constraint, V
lem for single thermal volume constraints, equa- multi-modal in nature.
and hydro unit [83–92] The cost characteristics
tion of continuity, dis- can be modeled with or
charge rate constraints without considering the
valve point effect

Economic dispatch prob- Power balance constraint, The objective func-

lem for single thermal f = ∑in=s 1 Ni F ( PT ) power limits constraint, V tion is non-linear and
volume constraints, equa- multi-modal in nature.
and multiple hydro units The cost characteristics
connected in cascaded tion of continuity, dis- can be modeled with or
connection [93–103] charge rate constraints without considering the
valve point effect
Power balance constraint The objective func-
Economic dispatch prob- (depends upon the na- tion is non-linear and
lem for thermal unit and f = ∑in=s 1 Ni F ( PT ) ture of the scheduling V
multi-modal in nature.
pumped hydro storage interval), power limits con- The cost characteristics
unit [104–107] straint, volume constraints, can be modeled with or
equation of continuity, without considering the
discharge rate constraints valve point effect

5. Economic Dispatch Problem for Conventional and Non-Conventional Sources

The recent shift in the paradigm from conventional to green energy demands the
reformulation of sophisticated optimization problems to optimally utilize both conventional
and distributed energy sources. The major reasons for opting for renewable sources are
their negligible emissions and environmental constraints. However, the production of such
sources largely depends on external atmospheric conditions, and the power output can
fluctuate in nature for different scheduling intervals [108,109]. To deal with this intermittent
nature of renewable sources, researchers have developed various optimization models
and forecasting algorithms to effectively coordinate different energy sources in a hybrid
power system. This section describes the basic forms of different objective functions and
constraints associated with such optimization problems and highlights various additions
to augment the nature of the practical problem [110,111].

5.1. Economic Dispatch of Conventional and Photovoltaic Energy Source

Owing to negligible environmental constraints and fossil fuel dependence, the pho-
tovoltaic (PV) energy source has gained popularity in generating a clean form of energy.
Researchers have developed several dispatch models to incorporate the PV energy source
to the conventional grid to fulfill the demand value over certain scheduling intervals.
The major challenge in the optimization problem including both PV and conventional
sources is the dependence of the PV source on the external atmosphere parameters. The in-
termittent nature of the PV source introduces certain limitations in predicting its power
output for different intervals. The output power of the PV plant is significantly influenced
by two atmospheric parameters, irradiance and temperature levels. Therefore, the first step
in solving the dispatch problem is to forecast the PV source parameters. Figure 6 shows
the basic block diagram for the hydro-solar-thermal scheduling problem.
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 15 of 28

Forecasted Parameters

Converter

PH PT PS

PH + PT + PS = PD + PL
Figure 6. Block diagram representation for hydrothermal solar scheduling problem including single hydro and thermal unit.

5.1.1. Forecasting of the PV Energy Source Parameters

The first step in the power output modeling of the PV source is to forecast or determine
the irradiance and temperature levels for different scheduling intervals. The authors in the
literature have suggested different methodologies to predict these parameters. The authors
in [112,113] have discussed the Box–Jenkins methodology to forecast the irradiance and
temperature values over different scheduling intervals based on certain training data.
The basic intuition behind the Box–Jenkins method is to tune the parameters of the auto-
regressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model based on the training data to
compute the forecast results [114,115]. The main parts—auto-regressive (AR indicated by
the order p), moving average (MA indicated by the order q), and differentiation (indicated
by the order d)—of the ARIMA model are listed as follows:
p


 α + +et + ∑k=1 θk Xt−k , AR Model
e + q δ e ,

∑ k =1 k t − k

t MAModel
Xt = p (31)


 α + ∑ k =1 θ k X k − n + e t ARMAModel
+ q δ e
∑ k =1 k t − k


where θk ∀ k ∈ {1, 2, 3, . . . , p} shows the parameters of the AR model. δk ∀ k ∈ {1, 2, 3, ..., q}

represent the parameters of the MA model. et shows the white noise term. To handle
non-stationary time series, the ARIMA model having order d [116] can be given as follows:
p q
(1 − ∑ θk Lk )(1 − Ld )Xt = (1 + ∑ δk Lk )et (32)
k =1 k =1

where the lag operation L is given as (Lk ( Xt ) = Xt−k ).

The second popular method of predicting the irradiance and temperature values for
different scheduling intervals is to compute the probability distribution function for these
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 16 of 28

parameters [117]. The commonly used distribution in the literature for the temperature
and irradiance levels is the beta distribution due to its flexibility in adjusting the curve
using different shape parameters. The probability density function for the beta distribution
is given as follows:

Γ ( α + β ) α −1
f (r; α, β) = r (1 − r ) β −1 , α, β ≥ 0, 0 ≤ r ≤ 1 (33)
Γ(α)Γ( β)

where α, β are the shape parameters, r represents the random variable for the parameters,
and Γ(.) shows the gamma function. f (r; α, β) shows the beta distribution function [118].
The parameters α and β depend upon the mean µ and standard deviation σ [119] as follows:

( µ + 1) µ
β = (1 − µ)( − 1) (34)
σ2
βµ
α= (35)
1−µ
These two techniques are most commonly used in the literature to compute the
irradiance and temperature levels for the dispatch problems of hybrid energy systems.
Other distributions such as Weibull distribution [120] can also be used. The next step in the
dispatch problem for the system consisting of solar and conventional sources is to compute
the PV power based on the forecasted parameters. Figure 7 shows the overall forecasting
and power computation model for the PV energy source.

PV Input Data

Irradiance Data Temperature Data

Data Model Estimation of

Collection Identification Parameters
Photovoltaic System Design

No
Valid
Forecasting
Forecast Diagnostic
Parameters
Model of Residuals Stage
Yes ?

Box Jenkins Methodology

Forecasted Forecasted
Irradiance Temperature

Mathematical Model
of PV Module

DC Power of Single Module

Modeling
PV Array
Converter operation at MPPT
Stage
Total DC Power of N number of Modules

Total AC Power
Grid

Figure 7. Basic flow chart for determining the PV power output for the economic dispatch problem.
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 17 of 28

5.1.2. Dispatch Problem Modeling

The output power of the PV module is determined using the irradiance and tempera-
ture levels for different scheduling intervals. Different mathematical models are suggested
in the literature to compute the output power of the PV plant based on external parameters.
The most common method used to determine the characteristics of the PV module is the
single diode model [121,122]. However, the single diode model introduces a challenge
to optimally selecting the different parameters for the equivalent circuit [123]. The other
methods involve modeling the characteristics of the PV module using the fractional integral
polynomial method [124] or using the double diode model to augment the efficiency of
the single-diode-based circuit [125,126]. The selection for the model depends upon the
requirement of the dispatch problem and can be selected based on the system parameters.
The next step in modeling the dispatch problem is to define the objective function
and discuss the different constraints associated with the PV power. The constraints for
hydro and thermal generation remain the same as previously discussed in the respective
sections. Therefore, we will only highlight the basic cost function for solar power and
discuss the possible PV constraints. The basic objective function which models the cost
equation for the PV plant represents a linear relation between a defined tariff rate and the
output power [112,113], given as follows:
ns
f s,j = ∑ Cj Hi Psj ,i (36)
i =1

where f s,j represents the cost of the jth PV plant. Cj represents the cost coefficient given
in $/kWhr for the jth plant, Hi represents the duration of particular scheduling interval i
given in hours, and Ps j ,i represents the output power of the jth plant given in kilowatts or
the i scheduling interval. The total cost or the objective function for S number of PV plants
is given as follows:
S
f2 = ∑ f s,m (37)
m =1

The overall cost function for the combined dispatch of hydro, thermal, and solar
energy sources is given as follows:

CT = f 1 + f 2 (38)

where f 1 represents the cost function for the hydro and thermal units as described pre-
viously. The typical constraint related to the solar power is the power limit constraint,
given [119] as follows:
Ps j ,min ≤ Ps j ,i ≤ Ps j ,max (39)
The remaining constraints remain the same for the hydro and thermal units as dis-
cussed previously in the respective sections. This represents the simplest form of the
solar-hydrothermal dispatch problem discussed in the literature. The basic objective func-
tion introduced can be modified by taking into consideration different practical constraints.
For instance, the authors in [127,128] have updated the objective function for thermal
generation by including the emission values while considering the PV energy source. This
modification introduces an additional emission cost for the thermal plant which has al-
ready been described in the previous sections. The authors in [129] have suggested the
economic dispatch of the system consisting of solar and electric vehicles. The authors
in [130] consider the pumped hydro storage in addition to the solar and thermal energy
sources. The basic modification in the objective function is in accordance with the previ-
ously defined generating and pumping intervals for the pumped hydro storage problem.
The authors in [131] modify the problem by considering the wind energy source in addition
to solar, thermal, and hydro energy sources. The details of incorporating the wind energy
source into the dispatch problem are discussed in the next section. This concludes the
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 18 of 28

dispatch for the PV energy source with conventional sources. A large number of objective
functions have been discussed for this particular dispatch problem by introducing small
changes in the original objective function. However, these changes are in accordance with
the different dispatch objective functions already discussed in the paper.

5.2. Economic Dispatch of Conventional and Wind Energy Source

Another renewable energy source which has gained popularity for generating clean
power is the wind energy system [132,133]. The output power of the wind system depends
primarily on the wind speed for different scheduling intervals. This again introduces
a challenge to handling the intermittent nature of the system [134,135]. For solving the
dispatch problem including a wind energy source, a similar procedure is required as
described previously for the PV system. Therefore, we will only discuss the changes
required to model the wind energy system. Figure 8 shows the basic configuration diagram
for the dispatch problem consisting of the conventional and wind energy system.

Thermal Fuel
Reservoir

Water Intake

Wind Speed

Hydro Power Thermal Power Wind Power

Demand + Losses = Hydro Power + Thermal Power + Wind Power

Figure 8. System configuration for the dispatch problem consisting of wind and conventional sources.

The first step is to approximate the wind speed for different intervals. Among the
different techniques discussed in the literature [136], the simplest and most conventional
method is to use a probability density function for determining the wind speed statistics.
The most commonly used probability density function for the wind speed is the Weibull
p.d.f. [137], given as follows:
a v a −1 v
f (v) = ( ) exp[−( ) a ] (Weibull p.d.f) (40)
b b b
where a represents the shape parameter, and b represents the scale parameter. When the
shape parameter a is taken as 2, another p.d.f. known as the Rayleigh p.d.f. [138] can be
written as follows:
2v v
f (v) = 2 exp[−( )2 ] (Rayleigh p.d.f) (41)
b b
2
where b = √ v ag (v ag represents the average wind speed). Based on the type of distribu-
π
tion used, the value of v ag can be determined as follows:
Z ∞ √
π
v ag = v. f (v) dv = b (Rayleigh Statistics) (42)
0 2
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 19 of 28

The output power of the wind energy system is usually determined based on the
average of the cubic wind speed. Therefore, the above relation can be modified to give the
average wind speed as follows:
Z ∞
3 3√
(v3 ) ag = v3 . f (v) dv = b π (43)
0 4
By substituting the value of the b, the above equation can be written as follows:

3√ 2 6
(v3 ) ag = π ( √ v ag )3 = v3ag (44)
4 π π

The average power of the wind can then be determined as follows:

6 1
Pag = . ρAv3ag (Rayleigh Statistics) (45)
π 2

where ρ represents the density of the air given in kg/m3 , and A represents the swept area
of the rotor given in m2 [139]. Additional terms such as efficiency of the system η and
coefficient of performance C p can also be included in the above equation to provide a
more realistic approach. The objective function for the overall dispatch problem including
conventional and wind energy power can then be formulated by taking relations similar
to those discussed for the solar energy source (a linear relationship between a defined
tariff and the power output of the wind system). The constraints defined for the dispatch
problem are same as previously defined for the hydro and thermal units with the addition
of the power limits constraint for the wind energy source [140,141].
Figure 9 shows the basic block diagram showing the major steps involved in solving
the dispatch problem consisting of conventional and distributed generation sources.

Forecasted Wind Speed

Mathematical
Estimation Stage Models for Wind
Forecasted Irradiance
Wind Speed Data and Photovoltaic
System
Forecasted Temperature

Wind Power Solar Power

Irradiance Data Hydro Power Power Balance

Equation

Temperature Data Thermal Power

Power Limit Constraints
Optimization Block
with Constraints
Reservoir Constraints

Discharge Rate
Constraints
Optimal Power of Hydro, Wind,
Solar and Thermal Source

Figure 9. Overall block diagram for computing the dispatch problem for hybrid energy systems
consisting of conventional and renewable sources.

6. Methods and Simulation Tools to Solve the ED for Integrated Systems

After highlighting the major types of dispatch problems along with discussing the
nature of the involved objective functions and constraints, the authors provide a brief
introduction of different optimization techniques used in the literature to find the opti-
mum solution. The two major sets of algorithms used in the literature are deterministic
and heuristic optimization algorithms. Deterministic algorithms try to achieve a global
solution by using a well-defined set of update equations. Such algorithms can be difficult
to implement for highly non-linear, multi-modal, and non-convex objective functions. On
the contrary, meta-heuristic optimization algorithms have a certain randomness in their
update equation and provide good approximates to the global solution for non-linear
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 20 of 28

and multi-modal problems. Some review papers have already been discussed in the
Introduction which compare the performance of different optimization algorithms for
various types of ED problems. Here, we will briefly highlight the major techniques used
for each type of ED problem. Among meta-heuristic optimization algorithms, promising
techniques used to solve the ED problem are the firefly algorithm (FA) [142,143], PSO [144],
accelerated particle swarm optimization (APSO) [145], harmony search algorithm [146],
and stochastic techniques [147]. A large set of different conventional techniques has also
been studied for solving different types of dispatch problems, such as the Lagrangian
relaxation method [148], mixed integer programming [149], dynamic programming [79],
and interior point programming [150]. Figure 10 shows the breakdown of different opti-
mization algorithms. Table 5 summarizes the behavior of a few promising meta-heuristic
techniques for each type of ED problem, while Table 6 summarizes basic features of the
most commonly used simulation tools to solve the ED problem.

Linear programming

Mixed integer linear programming

Deterministic techniques Non-linear programming

Dynamic programming
Solution Methods Lagrange multiplier method

Heuristic algorithms

Stochastic methods
Mata-Heuristic algorithms
(PSO, Firefly, TLBO, WCA)

Figure 10. Breakdown of different solution methods used to solve various forms of the ED problem.

Table 5. Brief summary and analysis of different optimization algorithms for various types of economic dispatch problems.

Algorithm Update Criteria Test System General Performance

Higher computational time

Meta-heuristic optimization Muti-objective combined
Teaching Learning Based Al- as compared to techniques
algorithm with two different economic emission dispatch
gorithm [67] such as PSO and FA. By mak-
phases (Teaching and Learn- problem having multiple
ing certain parametric modi-
ing) having multiple update thermal units with different
equations cost characteristics fications, the final converged
solution can be improved by
a substantial factor

Intermediate computational
Meta-heuristic optimization Short term hydrothermal effort in reaching towards the
APSO [112] algorithm with single update scheduling problem under optimal solution. Single up-
equation for reaching the op- the penetration of single date equation with the global
timum solution equivalent PV source best component improves the
performance of the algorithm
towards the optimal solution

Higher computational time

Meta-heuristic optimization Hydrothermal scheduling in reaching towards the op-
PSO [113] algorithm with two update timal solution. Two up-
problem under the penetra-
equations having both veloc- tion of multiple PV units date equations with both lo-
ity and position components cal and global search mecha-
nisms give promising results
in terms of reaching the final
solution

Lower execution time in

reaching towards the optimal
Meta-heuristic optimization Simple ED problem with mul- solution. The absence of
Firefly Algorithm [142,143] algorithm with single update tiple thermal units of differ- global best component can
equation for reaching the op- ent cost characteristics hav- result in trapping of the
timum solution ing valve point loading effect solution towards the local
optimum. However, differ-
ent parametric and structural
variants can improve the
convergence behaviour of the
algorithm
Promising results in attaining
Improved Harmony Search Meta-heuristic optimization Short term hydrothermal the global solution. Compu-
Algorithm [146] algorithm scheduling problem tational time is also compara-
ble to techniques like FA and
APSO
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 21 of 28

Table 6. Brief summary and analysis of different simulation tools to compute the ED problem.

Simulation Tool Advantages/Features Disadvantages

Economic dispatch of multi-generation Single line diagram of the system can

thermal system can be computed us- only be modeled using the software. Dif-
Power World Simulator [151] ing different cost functions. Power sys- ferent distributed energy sources and hy-
tem consisting of multiple thermal units droelectric source cannot be included ef-
can be modeled using variable charac- fectively in the system. Moreover, var-
teristics. In addition, different tech- ious advanced optimization techniques
niques such as Gauss–Seidel , Newton– cannot be implemented for solving the
Raphson, fast decoupled, and DC power objective functions
flow can be used for power flow studies

Different meta-heuristic and conven- ED algorithms need to be developed

tional optimization algorithms can be im-
MATLAB/Simulink [152] from scratch. The options to compute the
plemented for solving the dispatch prob-
optimal power flow and perform the con-
lems. The mathematical models for PV
energy source and wind energy system tingency analysis for the given system
are available to analyze the hybrid en- are not readily available
ergy systems

The contingency analysis and the opti-

mal power flow solution can be obtained Advanced optimization algorithms such
DIgSILENT [153] efficiently while solving the ED and unit as heuristic and meta-heuristic tech-
commitment problem. In addition, re- niques cannot be implemented effec-
newable energy sources and battery en- tively for obtaining the optimal solution
ergy storage can be included in the dis- for the hybrid energy systems
patch model. The emission, startup,
and operation cost functions can be op-
timized for different power sources

ED for multi-thermal power systems can Models for renewable energy sources
Electrical Transient Analyzer be computed using robust algorithms. are not readily available for develop-
Program (ETAP) [154] Fuel cost minimization along with the ing the dispatch scenario for hybrid en-
optimal energy management techniques ergy systems. Moreover, optimization al-
provides a good platform to solve dis- gorithms are largely limited to conven-
patch problems for non-linear cost func- tional techniques
tions

Stochastic and deterministic algorithms

Intermittent nature of renewable energy
PLEXOS [155] are available to compute the ED for
sources cannot be modeled efficiently for
multi-generation system. Moreover, unit
the dispatch problems of hybrid energy
commitment and dispatch problems can systems
be solved efficiently while considering
emission and fuel constraints

7. Conclusions and Future Directions

The formulation of scheduling problems for different hybrid and multi-generation
energy systems has become an important domain in the field of optimization theory. A num-
ber of optimization problems based on different objective functions depending upon the
configuration of the system have been suggested by researchers to model an actual system.
However, there are certain scenarios which have not been considered extensively while dis-
cussing the dispatch problems for different generating units. For instance, while discussing
dispatch for the system consisting of thermal units, cost characteristics are modeled only
using the quadratic cost equation in the majority of problems. However, the quadratic
function can be made linear using piece-wise linear functions to formulate another type of
objective function and compare its performance with conventional characteristics [156,157].
Similarly, for the hydrothermal scheduling problem, the conventional objective function
takes into account only cost characteristics of thermal generation while maintaining the
reservoir constraints. This approach is appreciable since the running cost of the hydro
power is negligible as compared to the thermal generation. However, if we are scheduling
over a long duration, then certain factors such as maintenance cost and operation and
management costs should be incorporated in the conventional objective function to better
formulate the optimization problem [158].
For scheduling problems involving a solar energy source, an important factor known
as the partial shading effect is usually not considered while computing the output power
of the PV module. The partial shading effect results in multiple local peaks for the power
curves instead of a global peak; therefore, it is essential to consider this effect, as the majority
of the literature suggests the operation of the PV plant at MPPT and neglects the tracking
procedure for the global optimum power. By considering this fact, the output power
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 22 of 28

models for the PV modules would be greatly influenced, and it would certainly introduce
a research gap to formulate more realistic optimization functions [159,160]. Similarly, for
renewable energy sources, the conventional cost equation can be updated to include the
overestimation and underestimation penalties to better formulate the objective function.
Another important consideration while developing the optimization models for hybrid
energy systems is to consider the resilience of the system. Power systems are vulnerable
to different faults and natural hazards. Therefore, proper contingency analysis would
be required to better schedule different energy sources while considering reliability and
resilience constraints. This would introduce modified forms of the optimization problems
for scheduling hybrid energy systems [161,162].
To conclude, power system optimization is extremely important for maintaining the
power balance of the system. Different dispatch models are required to find the optimum
power allocation of each energy source in a hybrid system. As the number of generating
sources increases, the optimization problem becomes more complex, non-linear, and multi-
dimensional in nature. The proper formulation of optimization functions would be required
to idealize a complex physical system incorporating different energy sources. This research
presents a state-of-the-art review of the major types of dispatch problems for different
energy sources while presenting the nature of each objective function and the generating
constraints involved.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, S.L., M.F.Z. and M.B.; methodology, S.L. and M.F.Z.; soft-
ware, S.L.; validation, S.L., M.F.Z. and M.B.; formal analysis, S.L., M.F.Z. and M.B.; writing—original
draft preparation, S.L. and M.F.Z.; writing—review and editing, S.L., M.F.Z. and M.B. All authors
have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement: Available upon request from the authors.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:

ED Economic Dispatch
STHTS Short Term Hydrothermal Scheduling
EED Economic Emission Dispatch
PV Photovoltaic
WES Wind Energy System
POZ Prohibited Operating Zones

References
1. Younes, Z.; Alhamrouni, I.; Mekhilef, S.; Reyasudin, M. A memory-based gravitational search algorithm for solving economic
dispatch problem in micro-grid. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2021, 12, 1985–1994. [CrossRef]
2. Mandal, B.; Roy, P.K. Dynamic economic dispatch problem in hybrid wind based power systems using oppositional based chaotic
grasshopper optimization algorithm. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 2021, 13, 013306. [CrossRef]
3. Bai, Y.; Wu, X.; Xia, A. An enhanced multi-objective differential evolution algorithm for dynamic environmental economic
dispatch of power system with wind power. Energy Sci. Eng. 2021, 9, 316–329. [CrossRef]
4. Bansal, N.; Gautam, R.; Tiwari, R.; Thapa, S.; Singh, A. Economic Load Dispatch Using Intelligent Particle Swarm Optimization.
In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Computing, Information and Control Systems; Pandian, A.P., Palanisamy, R.,
Ntalianis, K., Eds.; Springer Publishing: Midtown Manhattan, NY, USA, 2021; Volume 1272, pp. 93–105.
5. El-Sayed, W.T.; El-Saadany, E.F.; Zeineldin, H.H.; Al-Sumaiti, A.S. Fast initialization methods for the nonconvex economic
dispatch problem. Energy 2020, 201, 117635. [CrossRef]
6. Ali, M.; Zia, M.F.; Sundhu, M.W. Demand side management proposed algorithm for cost and peak load optimization. In Proceed-
ings of the 2016 4th International Istanbul Smart Grid Congress and Fair (ICSG), Istanbul, Turkey, 20–21 April 2016; pp. 1–5.
7. Moretti, L.; Martelli, E.; Manzolini, G. An efficient robust optimization model for the unit commitment and dispatch of
multi-energy systems and microgrids. Appl. Energy 2020, 261, 113859. [CrossRef]
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 23 of 28

8. Ogunmodede, O.; Anderson, K.; Cutler, D.; Newman, A. Optimizing design and dispatch of a renewable energy system. Appl.
Energy 2021, 287, 116527. [CrossRef]
9. Jian, L.; Qian, Z.; Liangang, Z.; Mengkai, Y. Distributed economic dispatch method for power system based on consensus. IET
Renew. Power Gener. 2020, 14, 1424–1432. [CrossRef]
10. Park, J.B.; Lee, K.S.; Shin, J.R.; Lee, K.Y. A particle swarm optimization for economic dispatch with nonsmooth cost functions.
IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2005, 20, 34–42. [CrossRef]
11. Niknam, T.; Azizipanah-Abarghooee, R.; Roosta, A. Reserve constrained dynamic economic dispatch: A new fast self-adaptive
modified firefly algorithm. IEEE Syst. J. 2012, 6, 635–646. [CrossRef]
12. Secui, D.C. A hybrid particle Swarm optimization algorithm for the economic dispatch problem. Majlesi J. Electr. Eng. 2015,
9, 37–53.
13. Li, X.; Li, A.; Lu, Z. A Granular Computing Method for Economic Dispatch Problems With Valve-Point Effects. IEEE Access 2019,
7, 78260–78273. [CrossRef]
14. Li, X.; Zhang, H.; Lu, Z. A Differential Evolution Algorithm Based on Multi-Population for Economic Dispatch Problems With
Valve-Point Effects. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 95585–95609. [CrossRef]
15. De Freitas, C.A.O.; de Oliveira, R.C.L.; Da Silva, D.J.A.; Leite, J.C.; Junior, J.D.A.B. Solution to Economic–Emission Load Dispatch
by Cultural Algorithm Combined With Local Search: Case Study. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 64023–64040. [CrossRef]
16. Radosavljević, J. A solution to the combined economic and emission dispatch using hybrid PSOGSA algorithm. Appl. Artif. Intell.
2016, 30, 445–474. [CrossRef]
17. Gil, E.; Bustos, J.; Rudnick, H. Short-term hydrothermal generation scheduling model using a genetic algorithm. IEEE Trans.
Power Syst. 2003, 18, 1256–1264. [CrossRef]
18. Basu, M. An interactive fuzzy satisfying method based on evolutionary programming technique for multiobjective short-term
hydrothermal scheduling. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2004, 69, 277–285. [CrossRef]
19. Lakshminarasimman, L.; Subramanian, S. Short-term scheduling of hydrothermal power system with cascaded reservoirs by
using modified differential evolution. IEE Proc.-Gener. Transm. Distrib. 2006, 153, 693–700. [CrossRef]
20. Nanda, J.; Bijwe, P. Optimal hydrothermal scheduling with cascaded plants using progressive optimality algorithm. IEEE Trans.
Power Appar. Syst. 1981, PAS-100, 2093–2099. [CrossRef]
21. Ferrero, R.; Rivera, J.; Shahidehpour, S. A dynamic programming two-stage algorithm for long-term hydrothermal scheduling of
multireservoir systems. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 1998, 13, 1534–1540. [CrossRef]
22. de Matos, V.L.; Finardi, E.C. A computational study of a stochastic optimization model for long term hydrothermal scheduling.
Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2012, 43, 1443–1452. [CrossRef]
23. Hlalele, T.G.; Naidoo, R.M.; Zhang, J.; Bansal, R.C. Dynamic economic dispatch with maximal renewable penetration under
renewable obligation. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 38794–38808. [CrossRef]
24. Yi, W.; Zhang, Y.; Zhao, Z.; Huang, Y. Multiobjective robust scheduling for smart distribution grids: Considering renewable
energy and demand response uncertainty. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 45715–45724. [CrossRef]
25. Tian, K.; Sun, W.; Han, D.; Yang, C. Coordinated planning with predetermined renewable energy generation targets using
extended two-stage robust optimization. IEEE Access 2019, 8, 2395–2407. [CrossRef]
26. Fan, S.; Li, Z.; Li, Z.; He, G. Evaluating and increasing the renewable energy share of customers’ electricity consumption. IEEE
Access 2019, 7, 129200–129214. [CrossRef]
27. Rasheed, M.B.; Qureshi, M.A.; Javaid, N.; Alquthami, T. Dynamic pricing mechanism with the integration of renewable energy
source in smart grid. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 16876–16892. [CrossRef]
28. Al Hadi, A.; Silva, C.A.S.; Hossain, E.; Challoo, R. Algorithm for demand response to maximize the penetration of renewable
energy. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 55279–55288. [CrossRef]
29. Jia, Y.; Dong, Z.Y.; Sun, C.; Meng, K. Cooperation-based distributed economic MPC for economic load dispatch and load
frequency control of interconnected power systems. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2019, 34, 3964–3966. [CrossRef]
30. Al-Agtash, S. Hydrothermal scheduling by augmented Lagrangian: Consideration of transmission constraints and pumped-
storage units. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2001, 16, 750–756. [CrossRef]
31. Diniz, A.; Sagastizábal, C.; Maceira, M. Assessment of Lagrangian relaxation with variable splitting for hydrothermal scheduling.
In Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE Power Engineering Society General Meeting, Tampa, FL, USA, 24–28 June 2007; pp. 1–8.
32. Catalão, J.P.d.S.; Pousinho, H.M.I.; Mendes, V. Scheduling of head-dependent cascaded hydro systems: Mixed-integer quadratic
programming approach. Energy Convers. Manag. 2010, 51, 524–530. [CrossRef]
33. Ruzic, S.; Vuckovic, A.; RajakoviC, N. A flexible approach to short-term hydro-thermal coordination. ii. dual problem solution
procedure. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 1996, 11, 1572–1578. [CrossRef]
34. Mandal, K.K.; Basu, M.; Chakraborty, N. Particle swarm optimization technique based short-term hydrothermal scheduling.
Appl. Soft Comput. 2008, 8, 1392–1399. [CrossRef]
35. Roy, P.K. Teaching learning based optimization for short-term hydrothermal scheduling problem considering valve point effect
and prohibited discharge constraint. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2013, 53, 10–19. [CrossRef]
36. De León-Aldaco, S.E.; Calleja, H.; Alquicira, J.A. Metaheuristic optimization methods applied to power converters: A review.
IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2015, 30, 6791–6803. [CrossRef]
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 24 of 28

37. Reddy, S.S.; Bijwe, P. Efficiency improvements in meta-heuristic algorithms to solve the optimal power flow problem. Int. J.
Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2016, 82, 288–302. [CrossRef]
38. Reddy, S.S. Solution of multi-objective optimal power flow using efficient meta-heuristic algorithm. Electr. Eng. 2018, 100, 401–413.
[CrossRef]
39. Gavrilas, M. Heuristic and metaheuristic optimization techniques with application to power systems. In Proceedings of the 12th
WSEAS International Conference on Mathematical Methods and Computational Techniques in Electrical Engineering, Politehnica
University of Timisoara, Timisoara, Romania, 21–23 October 2010; pp. 95–103.
40. Chowdhury, B.H.; Rahman, S. A review of recent advances in economic dispatch. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 1990, 5, 1248–1259.
[CrossRef]
41. Mahor, A.; Prasad, V.; Rangnekar, S. Economic dispatch using particle swarm optimization: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
2009, 13, 2134–2141. [CrossRef]
42. Boqiang, R.; Chuanwen, J. A review on the economic dispatch and risk management considering wind power in the power
market. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2009, 13, 2169–2174. [CrossRef]
43. Peng, M.; Liu, L.; Jiang, C. A review on the economic dispatch and risk management of the large-scale plug-in electric vehicles
(PHEVs)-penetrated power systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 1508–1515. [CrossRef]
44. Mahdi, F.P.; Vasant, P.; Kallimani, V.; Watada, J.; Fai, P.Y.S.; Abdullah-Al-Wadud, M. A holistic review on optimization strategies
for combined economic emission dispatch problem. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 81, 3006–3020. [CrossRef]
45. Panigrahi, T.K.; Sahoo, A.K.; Behera, A. A review on application of various heuristic techniques to combined economic and
emission dispatch in a modern power system scenario. Energy Procedia 2017, 138, 458–463. [CrossRef]
46. Nazari-Heris, M.; Mohammadi-Ivatloo, B.; Gharehpetian, G. Short-term scheduling of hydro-based power plants considering
application of heuristic algorithms: A comprehensive review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 74, 116–129. [CrossRef]
47. Nazari-heris, M.; Jabari, F.; Mohammadi-ivatloo, B.; Asadi, S.; Habibnezhad, M. An updated review on multi-carrier energy
systems with electricity, gas, and water energy sources. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 275, 123136. [CrossRef]
48. Nazari-Heris, M.; Mohammadi-Ivatloo, B.; Gharehpetian, G. A comprehensive review of heuristic optimization algorithms for
optimal combined heat and power dispatch from economic and environmental perspectives. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018,
81, 2128–2143. [CrossRef]
49. Moustafa, F.S.; El-Rafei, A.; Badra, N.; Abdelaziz, A.Y. Application and performance comparison of variants of the firefly
algorithm to the economic load dispatch problem. In Proceedings of the 2017 Third International Conference on Advances
in Electrical, Electronics, Information, Communication and Bio-Informatics (AEEICB), Chennai, India, 27–28 February 2017;
pp. 147–151.
50. Li, B.; Wang, Y.; Li, J.; Cao, S. A fully distributed approach for economic dispatch problem of smart grid. Energies 2018, 11, 1993.
[CrossRef]
51. Sinha, N.; Chakrabarti, R.; Chattopadhyay, P. Evolutionary programming techniques for economic load dispatch. IEEE Trans.
Evol. Comput. 2003, 7, 83–94. [CrossRef]
52. Yang, S.; Tan, S.; Xu, J.X. Consensus based approach for economic dispatch problem in a smart grid. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2013,
28, 4416–4426. [CrossRef]
53. Abbas, G.; Gu, J.; Farooq, U.; Asad, M.U.; El-Hawary, M. Solution of an economic dispatch problem through particle swarm
optimization: A detailed survey-part I. IEEE Access 2017, 5, 15105–15141. [CrossRef]
54. Abbas, G.; Gu, J.; Farooq, U.; Raza, A.; Asad, M.U.; El-Hawary, M.E. Solution of an economic dispatch problem through particle
swarm optimization: A detailed survey–Part II. IEEE Access 2017, 5, 24426–24445. [CrossRef]
55. Pradhan, M.; Roy, P.K.; Pal, T. Oppositional based grey wolf optimization algorithm for economic dispatch problem of power
system. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2018, 9, 2015–2025. [CrossRef]
56. Al-Bahrani, L.T.; Patra, J.C.; Stojcevski, A. Solving economic dispatch problem under valve-point loading effects and generation
constrains using a multi-gradient PSO algorithm. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Joint Conference on Neural Networks
(IJCNN), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 8–13 July 2018; pp. 1–8.
57. Yang, Y.; Wei, B.; Liu, H.; Zhang, Y.; Zhao, J.; Manla, E. Chaos firefly algorithm with self-adaptation mutation mechanism for
solving large-scale economic dispatch with valve-point effects and multiple fuel options. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 45907–45922.
[CrossRef]
58. Walters, D.C.; Sheble, G.B. Genetic algorithm solution of economic dispatch with valve point loading. IEEE Trans. Power Syst.
1993, 8, 1325–1332. [CrossRef]
59. Niknam, T.; Mojarrad, H.D.; Meymand, H.Z. A novel hybrid particle swarm optimization for economic dispatch with valve-point
loading effects. Energy Convers. Manag. 2011, 52, 1800–1809. [CrossRef]
60. Banerjee, S.; Maity, D.; Chanda, C.K. Teaching learning based optimization for economic load dispatch problem considering
valve point loading effect. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2015, 73, 456–464. [CrossRef]
61. Reddy, A.S.; Vaisakh, K. Shuffled differential evolution for economic dispatch with valve point loading effects. Int. J. Electr. Power
Energy Syst. 2013, 46, 342–352. [CrossRef]
62. Benasla, L.; Belmadani, A.; Rahli, M. Spiral optimization algorithm for solving combined economic and emission dispatch. Int. J.
Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2014, 62, 163–174. [CrossRef]
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 25 of 28

63. Bhattacharya, A.; Chattopadhyay, P.K. Solving economic emission load dispatch problems using hybrid differential evolution.
Appl. Soft Comput. 2011, 11, 2526–2537. [CrossRef]
64. Güvenç, U.; Sönmez, Y.; Duman, S.; Yörükeren, N. Combined economic and emission dispatch solution using gravitational
search algorithm. Sci. Iran. 2012, 19, 1754–1762. [CrossRef]
65. Hu, Z.; Li, Z.; Dai, C.; Xu, X.; Xiong, Z.; Su, Q. Multiobjective grey prediction evolution algorithm for environmental/economic
dispatch problem. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 84162–84176. [CrossRef]
66. Apostolopoulos, T.; Vlachos, A. Application of the firefly algorithm for solving the economic emissions load dispatch problem.
Int. J. Comb. 2010, 2011, 523806. [CrossRef]
67. Roy, P.K.; Bhui, S. Multi-objective quasi-oppositional teaching learning based optimization for economic emission load dispatch
problem. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2013, 53, 937–948. [CrossRef]
68. Aswan, N.; Abdullah, M.; Bakar, A.A. A review of combined economic emission dispatch for optimal power dispatch with
renewable energy. Indones. J. Electr. Eng. Comput. Sci. 2019, 16, 33–40. [CrossRef]
69. Spea, S. Economic-emission dispatch problem using firefly algorithm. In Proceedings of the 2017 Nineteenth International
Middle East Power Systems Conference (MEPCON), Cairo, Egypt, 19–21 December 2017; pp. 671–676.
70. Sivasubramani, S.; Swarup, K. Environmental/economic dispatch using multi-objective harmony search algorithm. Electr. Power
Syst. Res. 2011, 81, 1778–1785. [CrossRef]
71. Balamurugan, R.; Subramanian, S. A simplified recursive approach to combined economic emission dispatch. Electr. Power
Components Syst. 2007, 36, 17–27. [CrossRef]
72. Dhillon, J.; Parti, S.; Kothari, D. Stochastic economic emission load dispatch. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 1993, 26, 179–186. [CrossRef]
73. Abdelaziz, A.Y.; Ali, E.S.; Abd Elazim, S. Implementation of flower pollination algorithm for solving economic load dispatch and
combined economic emission dispatch problems in power systems. Energy 2016, 101, 506–518. [CrossRef]
74. Basu, M. Dynamic economic emission dispatch using nondominated sorting genetic algorithm-II. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst.
2008, 30, 140–149. [CrossRef]
75. Zou, D.; Li, S.; Li, Z.; Kong, X. A new global particle swarm optimization for the economic emission dispatch with or without
transmission losses. Energy Convers. Manag. 2017, 139, 45–70. [CrossRef]
76. Jadoun, V.K.; Gupta, N.; Niazi, K.; Swarnkar, A. Modulated particle swarm optimization for economic emission dispatch. Int. J.
Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2015, 73, 80–88. [CrossRef]
77. Sifuentes, W.S.; Vargas, A. Hydrothermal scheduling using benders decomposition: Accelerating techniques. IEEE Trans. Power
Syst. 2007, 22, 1351–1359. [CrossRef]
78. dos Santos, T.N.; Diniz, A.L. A new multiperiod stage definition for the multistage benders decomposition approach applied to
hydrothermal scheduling. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2009, 24, 1383–1392. [CrossRef]
79. Hoseynpour, O.; Mohammadi-Ivatloo, B.; Nazari-Heris, M.; Asadi, S. Application of dynamic non-linear programming technique
to non-convex short-term hydrothermal scheduling problem. Energies 2017, 10, 1440. [CrossRef]
80. Uturbey, W.; Costa, A.S. Dynamic optimal power flow approach to account for consumer response in short term hydrothermal
coordination studies. IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 2007, 1, 414–421. [CrossRef]
81. Mezger, A.J.; de Almeida, K.C. Short term hydrothermal scheduling with bilateral transactions via bundle method. Int. J. Electr.
Power Energy Syst. 2007, 29, 387–396. [CrossRef]
82. Troncoso, A.; Riquelme, J.C.; Aguilar-Ruiz, J.S.; Santos, J.M.R. Evolutionary techniques applied to the optimal short-term
scheduling of the electrical energy production. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2008, 185, 1114–1127. [CrossRef]
83. Ghosh, S.; Kaur, M.; Bhullar, S.; Karar, V. Hybrid abc-bat for solving short-term hydrothermal scheduling problems. Energies
2019, 12, 551. [CrossRef]
84. Mohamed, M.; Youssef, A.R.; Kamel, S.; Ebeed, M. Lightning attachment procedure optimization algorithm for nonlinear
non-convex short-term hydrothermal generation scheduling. Soft Comput. 2020, 24, 16225–16248. [CrossRef]
85. Yin, H.; Wu, F.; Meng, X.; Lin, Y.; Fan, J.; Meng, A. Crisscross optimization based short-term hydrothermal generation scheduling
with cascaded reservoirs. Energy 2020, 203, 117822. [CrossRef]
86. Kong, J.; Skjelbred, H.I.; Fosso, O.B. An overview on formulations and optimization methods for the unit-based short-term hydro
scheduling problem. Electr. Power Syst. Res. 2020, 178, 106027. [CrossRef]
87. Alquthami, T.; Butt, S.E.; Tahir, M.F.; Mehmood, K. Short-term optimal scheduling of hydro-thermal power plants using artificial
bee colony algorithm. Energy Rep. 2020, 6, 984–992.
88. Das, S.; Bhattacharya, A.; Chakraborty, A.K. Solution of short-term hydrothermal scheduling using sine cosine algorithm. Soft
Comput. 2018, 22, 6409–6427. [CrossRef]
89. Wu, Y.; Wu, Y.; Liu, X. Couple-based particle swarm optimization for short-term hydrothermal scheduling. Appl. Soft Comput.
2019, 74, 440–450. [CrossRef]
90. Nguyen, T.T.; Vo, D.N.; Dinh, B.H. An effectively adaptive selective cuckoo search algorithm for solving three complicated
short-term hydrothermal scheduling problems. Energy 2018, 155, 930–956. [CrossRef]
91. Nazari-Heris, M.; Mohammadi-Ivatloo, B.; Haghrah, A. Optimal short-term generation scheduling of hydrothermal systems by
implementation of real-coded genetic algorithm based on improved Mühlenbein mutation. Energy 2017, 128, 77–85. [CrossRef]
92. Kaur, M.; Dhillon, J.; Kothari, D. Crisscross differential evolution algorithm for constrained hydrothermal scheduling. Appl. Soft
Comput. 2020, 93, 106393. [CrossRef]
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 26 of 28

93. Mandal, K.K.; Chakraborty, N. Short-term combined economic emission scheduling of hydrothermal systems with cascaded
reservoirs using particle swarm optimization technique. Appl. Soft Comput. 2011, 11, 1295–1302. [CrossRef]
94. Xiong, H.; Chen, M.; Lin, Y.; Yuan, Y.; Yuan, X. An improved PSO approach to short-term economic dispatch of cascaded
hydropower plants. Kybernetes 2010, 39, 1359–1365.
95. Nguyen, T.T.; Vo, D.N.; Dao, T.T. Cuckoo search algorithm using different distributions for short-term hydrothermal scheduling
with cascaded hydropower plants. In Proceedings of the TENCON 2014–2014 IEEE Region 10 Conference, Bangkok, Thailand,
22–25 October 2014; pp. 1–6
96. Nguyen, T.T.; Vo, D.N. Solving short-term cascaded hydrothermal scheduling problem using modified cuckoo search algorithm.
Int. J. Grid Distrib. Comput. 2016, 9, 67–78. [CrossRef]
97. Nguyen, T.T.; Van Duong, T.; Vo, D.N.; Nguyen, B.Q. Solving Bi-Objective Short-Term Cascaded Hydrothermal Scheduling
Problem Using Modified Cuckoo Search Algorithm. In AETA 2015: Recent Advances in Electrical Engineering and Related Sciences;
Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; pp. 213–222.
98. Liu, J.; Luo, X. Short-term optimal environmental economic hydrothermal scheduling based on handling complicated constraints
of multi-chain cascaded hydropower station. Proc. CSEE 2012, 32, 27–35.
99. Guan, X.; Ni, E.; Li, R.; Luh, P.B. An optimization-based algorithm for scheduling hydrothermal power systems with cascaded
reservoirs and discrete hydro constraints. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 1997, 12, 1775–1780. [CrossRef]
100. Xi, E.; Guan, X.; Li, R. Scheduling hydrothermal power systems with cascaded and head-dependent reservoirs. IEEE Trans. Power
Syst. 1999, 14, 1127–1132.
101. Shaaban, M.; Zeynal, H.; Nor, K. MILP-based short-term thermal unit commitment and hydrothermal scheduling including
cascaded reservoirs and fuel constraints. Int. J. Electr. Comput. Eng. 2019, 9, 2732–2742. [CrossRef]
102. WU, J.; TANG, L.; HAN, J. Short-term Optimal Scheduling of Cascaded Hydropower Stations Based on Sequential Quadratic
Programming. Proc. CSEE 2010, 30, 43–4
103. Mandal, K.K.; Tudu, B.; Chakraborty, N. A new improved particle swarm optimization technique for daily economic generation
scheduling of cascaded hydrothermal systems. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Swarm, Evolutionary, and
Memetic Computing, Chennai, India, 16–18 December 2010; pp. 680–688.
104. Khandualo, S.; Barisal, A.; Hota, P. Scheduling of pumped storage hydrothermal system with evolutionary programming. J. Clean
Energy Technol. 2013, 1, 308–312. [CrossRef]
105. Bello, S.; Akorede, M.; Pouresmaeil, E.; Ibrahim, O. Unit commitment optimisation of hydro-thermal power systems in the
day-ahead electricity market. Cogent Eng. 2016, 3, 1251009. [CrossRef]
106. Wood, A.J.; Wollenberg, B.F.; Sheblé, G.B. Power Generation, Operation, and Control; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2013.
107. Chen, P.H. Pumped-storage scheduling using evolutionary particle swarm optimization. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 2008,
23, 294–301. [CrossRef]
108. Rivarolo, M.; Greco, A.; Massardo, A. Thermo-economic optimization of the impact of renewable generators on poly-generation
smart-grids including hot thermal storage. Energy Convers. Manag. 2013, 65, 75–83. [CrossRef]
109. Korkas, C.D.; Baldi, S.; Michailidis, I.; Kosmatopoulos, E.B. Occupancy-based demand response and thermal comfort optimization
in microgrids with renewable energy sources and energy storage. Appl. Energy 2016, 163, 93–104. [CrossRef]
110. Chakraborty, S.; Senjyu, T.; Saber, A.Y.; Yona, A.; Funabashi, T. Optimal thermal unit commitment integrated with renewable
energy sources using advanced particle swarm optimization. IEEJ Trans. Electr. Electron. Eng. 2009, 4, 609–617. [CrossRef]
111. Banos, R.; Manzano-Agugliaro, F.; Montoya, F.; Gil, C.; Alcayde, A.; Gómez, J. Optimization methods applied to renewable and
sustainable energy: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2011, 15, 1753–1766. [CrossRef]
112. Liaquat, S.; Fakhar, M.S.; Kashif, S.A.R.; Rasool, A.; Saleem, O.; Padmanaban, S. Performance analysis of APSO and firefly
algorithm for short term optimal scheduling of multi-generation hybrid energy system. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 177549–177569.
[CrossRef]
113. Liaquat, S.; Fakhar, M.S.; Kashif, S.A.R.; Rasool, A.; Saleem, O.; Zia, M.F.; Padmanaban, S. Application of Dynamically Search
Space Squeezed Modified Firefly Algorithm to a Novel Short Term Economic Dispatch of Multi-Generation Systems. IEEE Access
2020, 9, 1918–1939. [CrossRef]
114. Khashei, M.; Bijari, M.; Hejazi, S.R. Combining seasonal ARIMA models with computational intelligence techniques for time
series forecasting. Soft Comput. 2012, 16, 1091–1105. [CrossRef]
115. Yunus, K.; Thiringer, T.; Chen, P. ARIMA-based frequency-decomposed modeling of wind speed time series. IEEE Trans. Power
Syst. 2015, 31, 2546–2556. [CrossRef]
116. Paretkar, P.S.; Mili, L.; Centeno, V.; Jin, K.; Miller, C. Short-term forecasting of power flows over major transmission interties:
Using Box and Jenkins ARIMA methodology. In Proceedings of the IEEE PES General Meeting, Minneapolis, MN, USA, 25–29
July 2010; pp. 1–8.
117. Fatemi, S.A.; Kuh, A.; Fripp, M. Parametric methods for probabilistic forecasting of solar irradiance. Renew. Energy 2018,
129, 666–676. [CrossRef]
118. Teng, J.H.; Luan, S.W.; Lee, D.J.; Huang, Y.Q. Optimal charging/discharging scheduling of battery storage systems for distribution
systems interconnected with sizeable PV generation systems. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2012, 28, 1425–1433. [CrossRef]
119. Suresh, V.; Sreejith, S. Generation dispatch of combined solar thermal systems using dragonfly algorithm. Computing 2017,
99, 59–80. [CrossRef]
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 27 of 28

120. Afzaal, M.U.; Sajjad, I.A.; Awan, A.B.; Paracha, K.N.; Khan, M.F.N.; Bhatti, A.R.; Zubair, M.; Amin, S.; Haroon, S.S.; Liaqat, R.;
et al. Probabilistic generation model of solar irradiance for grid connected photovoltaic systems using weibull distribution.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 2241. [CrossRef]
121. Rasheed, M.; Shihab, S.; Rashid, T. The Single Diode Model for PV Characteristics Using Electrical Circuit. J. Al-Qadisiyah Comput.
Sci. Math. 2021, 13, 131.
122. Rasheed, M.S.; Shihab, S. Modelling and Parameter Extraction of PV Cell Using Single-Diode Model. Adv. Energy Convers. Mater.
2020, 1, 96–104. [CrossRef]
123. Nguyen-Duc, T.; Nguyen-Duc, H.; Le-Viet, T.; Takano, H. Single-diode models of PV modules: A comparison of conventional
approaches and proposal of a novel model. Energies 2020, 13, 1296. [CrossRef]
124. Ortiz-Rivera, E.I. Approximation of a photovoltaic module model using fractional and integral polynomials. In Proceedings of
the 2012 38th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference, Bandung, Indonesia, 23–24 September 2020; pp. 002927–002931.
125. Cavalcanti, M.C.; Bradaschia, F.; Junior, A.J.N.; Azevedo, G.M.; Barbosa, E.J. Hybrid maximum power point tracking technique
for PV modules based on a double-diode model. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2020, 68, 8169–8181. [CrossRef]
126. Messaoud, R.B. Extraction of uncertain parameters of single and double diode model of a photovoltaic panel using Salp Swarm
algorithm. Measurement 2020, 154, 107446. [CrossRef]
127. Dubey, S.M.; Dubey, H.M.; Pandit, M. Combined Economic Emission Dispatch of Hybrid Thermal PV System Using Artificial Bee
Colony Optimization. In Nature Inspired Optimization for Electrical Power System; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020;
pp. 55–67.
128. Salkuti, S.R. Multi-objective based economic environmental dispatch with stochastic solar-wind-thermal power system. Int. J.
Electr. Comput. Eng. (2088-8708) 2020, 10, 4543–4551. [CrossRef]
129. Suresh, V.; Sreejith, S.; Sudabattula, S.K.; Cherukuri, S.H.C.; Prabaharan, N.; Siano, P.; Alhelou, H.H. Stochastic economic dispatch
incorporating commercial electric vehicles and fluctuating energy sources. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 216332–216348. [CrossRef]
130. Howlader, H.O.R.; Furukakoi, M.; Matayoshi, H.; Senjyu, T. Duck curve problem solving strategies with thermal unit commitment
by introducing pumped storage hydroelectricity & renewable energy. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE 12th International
Conference on Power Electronics and Drive Systems (PEDS), Honolulu, HI, USA, 12–15 December 2017; pp. 502–506.
131. Peng, C.; Xie, P.; Pan, L.; Yu, R. Flexible robust optimization dispatch for hybrid wind/photovoltaic/hydro/thermal power
system. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2015, 7, 751–762. [CrossRef]
132. Liu, G.; Zhu, Y.L.; Jiang, W. Wind-thermal dynamic economic emission dispatch with a hybrid multi-objective algorithm based
on wind speed statistical analysis. IET Gener. Transm. Distrib. 2018, 12, 3972–3984. [CrossRef]
133. Jiang, S.; Zhang, C.; Wu, W.; Chen, S. Combined economic and emission dispatch problem of wind-thermal power system using
gravitational particle swarm optimization algorithm. Math. Probl. Eng. 2019, 2019, 1–19. [CrossRef]
134. Basu, M. Multi-area dynamic economic emission dispatch of hydro-wind-thermal power system. Renew. Energy Focus 2019,
28, 11–35. [CrossRef]
135. Cuesta, M.; Castillo-Calzadilla, T.; Borges, C. A critical analysis on hybrid renewable energy modeling tools: An emerging
opportunity to include social indicators to optimise systems in small communities. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 122, 109691.
[CrossRef]
136. Murthy, K.; Rahi, O. A comprehensive review of wind resource assessment. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 72, 1320–1342.
[CrossRef]
137. Bidaoui, H.; El Abbassi, I.; El Bouardi, A.; Darcherif, A. Wind speed data analysis using Weibull and Rayleigh distribution
functions, case study: Five cities northern Morocco. Procedia Manuf. 2019, 32, 786–793. [CrossRef]
138. Anjum, L. Wind resource estimation techniques-an overview. Int. J. Wind Renew. Energy 2014, 3, 26–38.
139. Serban, A.; Paraschiv, L.S.; Paraschiv, S. Assessment of wind energy potential based on Weibull and Rayleigh distribution models.
Energy Rep. 2020, 6, 250–267. [CrossRef]
140. Huang, K.; Liu, P.; Ming, B.; Kim, J.S.; Gong, Y. Economic operation of a wind-solar-hydro complementary system considering
risks of output shortage, power curtailment and spilled water. Appl. Energy 2021, 290, 116805. [CrossRef]
141. Dhifaoui, C.; Marouani, I.; Abdallah, H.H. Optimization Hydro-thermal-wind-PV solar using MOPSO algorithm applied to
economic/environmental dispatch. Int. J. Appl. Eng. Res. 2021, 16, 228–241.
142. Liaquat, S.; Fakhar, M.S.; Kashif, S.A.R.; Saleem, O. Statistical Analysis of Accelerated PSO, Firefly and Enhanced Firefly for
Economic Dispatch Problem. In Proceedings of the 2021 6th International Conference on Renewable Energy: Generation and
Applications (ICREGA), Al Ain, United Arab Emirates, 2–4 February 2021; pp. 106–111.
143. Liaquat, S.; Saleem, O.; Azeem, K. Comparison of Firefly and Hybrid Firefly-APSO Algorithm for Power Economic Dispatch
Problem. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Technology and Policy in Energy and Electric Power (ICT-PEP),
Bandung, Indonesia, 23–24 September 2020; pp. 94–99.
144. Fakhar, M.S.; Liaquat, S.; Kashif, S.A.R.; Rasool, A.; Khizer, M.; Iqbal, M.A.; Baig, M.A.; Padmanaban, S. Conventional and
metaheuristic optimization algorithms for solving short term hydrothermal scheduling problem: A review. IEEE Access 2021,
9, 25993–26025. [CrossRef]
145. Fakhar, M.S.; Kashif, S.A.R.; Liaquat, S.; Rasool, A.; Padmanaban, S.; Iqbal, M.A.; Baig, M.A.; Khan, B. Implementation of APSO
and Improved APSO on Non-Cascaded and Cascaded Short Term Hydrothermal Scheduling. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 77784–77797.
[CrossRef]
Electronics 2021, 10, 1688 28 of 28

146. Nazari-Heris, M.; Babaei, A.F.; Mohammadi-Ivatloo, B.; Asadi, S. Improved harmony search algorithm for the solution of
non-linear non-convex short-term hydrothermal scheduling. Energy 2018, 151, 226–237. [CrossRef]
147. Nazari-Heris, M.; Mohammadi-Ivatloo, B.; Asadi, S. Robust stochastic optimal short-term generation scheduling of hydrothermal
systems in deregulated environment. J. Energy Syst. 2018, 2, 168–179. [CrossRef]
148. Farhat, I.; El-Hawary, M. Optimization methods applied for solving the short-term hydrothermal coordination problem. Electr.
Power Syst. Res. 2009, 79, 1308–1320. [CrossRef]
149. Wu, H.; Guan, X.; Zhai, Q.; Gao, F. Short-term hydrothermal scheduling using mixed-integer linear programming. Proc. CSEE
2009, 29, 82–88.
150. Ramos, J.L.M.; Lora, A.T.; Santos, J.R.; Exposito, A.G. Short-term hydro-thermal coordination based on interior point nonlinear
programming and genetic algorithms. In Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Porto Power Tech Proceedings (Cat. No. 01EX502), Porto,
Portugal, 10–13 September 2001; Volume 3, p. 6.
151. Power World Simulator Software Description. Available online: https://www.powerworld.com/ (accessed on 1 March 2021).
152. MATLAB Software Description. Available online: https://www.mathworks.com/products/matlab.html (accessed on 1 April 2021).
153. DIgSILENT Power System Solutions. Available online: https://www.digsilent.de/en/unit-commitment-and-dispatch-
optimisation.html (accessed on 21 April 2021).
154. ETAP Software Description. Available online: https://etap.com/es/product/economic-dispatch-software (accessed on
11 May 2021).
155. Webinar on “Economic Dispatch and Unit Commitment Modelling Using PLEXOS. Available online: https://www.saarcenergy.
org/webinar-on-economic-dispatch-and-unit-commitment-modelling-using-plexos-or-similar-software/ (accessed on
25 May 2021).
156. Won, J.R.; Park, Y.M. Economic dispatch solutions with piecewise quadratic cost functions using improved genetic algorithm. Int.
J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2003, 25, 355–361. [CrossRef]
157. Shoults, R.; Mead, M. Optimal estimation of piece-wise linear incremental cost curves for EDC. IEEE Trans. Power Appar. Syst.
1984, PAS-103, 1432–1438. [CrossRef]
158. Singal, S. Operation and maintenance problems in hydro turbine material in small hydro power plant. Mater. Today Proc. 2015,
2, 2323–2331.
159. Mansoor, M.; Mirza, A.F.; Ling, Q. Harris hawk optimization-based MPPT control for PV Systems under Partial Shading
Conditions. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 274, 122857. [CrossRef]
160. Mirza, A.F.; Mansoor, M.; Ling, Q.; Yin, B.; Javed, M.Y. A Salp-Swarm Optimization based MPPT technique for harvesting
maximum energy from PV systems under partial shading conditions. Energy Convers. Manag. 2020, 209, 112625. [CrossRef]
161. Bhusal, N.; Abdelmalak, M.; Kamruzzaman, M.; Benidris, M. Power system resilience: Current practices, challenges, and future
directions. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 18064–18086. [CrossRef]
162. Liu, X.; Hou, K.; Jia, H.; Zhao, J.; Mili, L.; Mu, Y.; Rim, J.; Lei, Y. A resilience assessment approach for power system from
perspectives of system and component levels. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2020, 118, 105837. [CrossRef]