2 views

Uploaded by Mohamed Mansour

fgffgbgf

save

- lect_lg
- 580S-2
- Reliability-Based Structural Design Optimization for Nonlinear Structures in OpenSees
- KT
- Airline Crew Scheduling
- Practice 2
- Traffic Signal Optimization
- Sparse Coding - An Overview
- Risk Assesment Methology for Toxic Chemicals Evaporation
- The Dynamic Berth Allocation Problem for a Container Port
- CHAPTER 3.docx
- A 03940116
- power economy
- Operation Management-NPTEL-Lec4
- Lagrange Multipliers Basics
- NpsF8E7.Tmp
- Thesis ElAbd Uw-PSO
- Genetic Algorithm for the Design of Cellularmanufacturing System Integrating Structural and Operationalparameters
- Economic Dispatch Control
- 202-2073-1-PB
- CSO.pdf
- UC
- dense 3D.pdf
- Full and Partial Class Relevant Genes
- Application of the Genetic Algorithm...
- 1
- GA Resefdarch Article 1
- 2Chapter_2 Salvatore
- PSO(Particle Swam Optimization)
- AI.pdf
- المشرف هو حلقة الوصل مابين الإدارة وبين العمال
- AIAA-2010-4224.pdf
- Wbest03 Union Air
- 097
- 381 Borsh
- Intro Sal 2 Assignment 1
- wbest04_Wyndor
- Wbest03 Save It
- R-T4-UAV.pdf
- Priority Rules IJPE2010
- 026_Chapter 5 _L19_(03-10-2013).pdf
- 9-2_Solving the Multi-Resource Constrained Project Scheduling Problem Using Ant Colony Optimization
- Sheet Metal.pdf
- Inventory.docx
- 027-032_for_web
- 29 Product
- Saudi Research Kpi
- 15-02319Erik OlofssonRapport
- Han1500 Manual
- 6 336 1048 1 LE Ok Importantttttttttttttttttttttttttt
- 027-032_for_web
- Copy of List8432-6029
- Copy of List8432-6029
- gen_naca_sym.m
- 19

You are on page 1of 21

**Unit Commitment Problem --- A Brief Literature Survey
**

2.1

Introduction

The Unit Commitment Problem (UCP) is a large scale, non-linear, 0-1 combinatorial

optimization problem.

This chapter presents an overview and literature survey on UCP. Final section includes

the directions on which the new approaches evolved with time, discussion and potential avenues

for further investigations including hybrid approaches.

2.2

**Power System Operational Planning
**

The objectives of the power system operational planning involves the best utilization of

**available energy resources subjected to various constraints and to transfer electrical energy from
**

generating stations to the consumers with maximum safety of personal/equipment, continuity,

and quality at minimum cost.

The operational planning involves many steps such as short term load forecasting, unit

commitment, economic dispatch, hydrothermal coordination, control of active/reactive power

generation, voltage, and frequency as well as interchanges among the interconnected systems in

power pools etc.

In the early days the power system consisted of isolated stations and their individual

loads. But at present the power systems are highly interconnected in which several generating

stations run in parallel and feed a high voltage network which then supplies a set of consuming

centers. Such system has the advantages of running the number of stations with greater reliability

and economy, but at the same time the complexity in the operational and control procedures has

increased. The power industry therefore requires the services of the group of men who are

specially trained to look after the operation of the system. These men are known as the system

engineers and are responsible for the operation, control and operational planning of the system.

7

**Unit Commitment involves the hour-to-hour ordering of the units on/off in the system to
**

match the anticipated load and to allow a safety margin. Having solved the unit commitment

problem and having ensured through security analysis that present system is in a secure state

then the efforts are made to adjust the loading on the individual generators to achieve minimum

production cost on minute-to-minute basis. This loading of generators subjected to minimum

operation cost is in essence the economic dispatch.

Load forecasting gives an accurate picture of the expected demand over the following

few hours. In an anticipation of the variations in demand and for reasons of economic operation

of the system the unit commitment activity is carried out.

The solution methods being used to solve the UCP can be divided into three categories as:

•

**Single classical/Deterministic approaches: A variety of classical/deterministic single
**

techniques in this context have been reported such as: Priority List (PL), Dynamic

Programming (DP), Exhaustive Enumeration (Brute Force Technique), Branch and

Bound (B&B), Integer /Mixed integer programming (IP/MIP), Lagrangian Relaxation

(LR), Straight Forward (SF) and Secant Methods.

•

**Single non classical approaches: The popular single non classical approaches which got
**

attention in recent years are such as: Tabu Search (TS), simulated annealing (SA), Expert

System (ES), Artificial Neural Networks (ANN), Evolutionary Programming (EP),

Genetic algorithms (GA), Fuzzy Logic (FL), Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), Ant

Colony Optimization (A.C.O), and Greedy Randomized Adaptive Search Procedure

(GRASP).

•

**Hybrid techniques based on classical and non-classical approaches: More recently
**

hybrid techniques combining two or more of the above mentioned optimization

techniques were proposed to solve UCP such as: Particle Swarm Optimization Based

Simulated Annealing, Enhanced Lagrange Relaxation, Augmented Lagrange Relaxation,

Fuzzy Adaptive Particle Swarm Optimization, Hybrid Particle Swarm Optimization,

Lagrange Relaxation Parallel Particle Swarm Optimization, Lagrange Relaxation Parallel

Relative Particle Swarm Optimization, Unit Characteristics Classification-Genetic

8

1. Lagrange Relaxation. They are heuristic and have dimensionality problem. T. This section presents a survey of the research work based on techniques both using conventional as well as Artificial Intelligence (AI) approaches. 9 . Ant Colony Simulated Annealing. The approach consists of two steps.Genetic Algorithm. [15] introduced extended priority list (EPL) method. et al. A number of methodologies to solve the UCP exist and are under investigation [5-14]. Senjyu. start-up and shut-down costs) and is referred as the cost-based-unit-commitment (CBUC) problem [2–3]. Dynamic Programming.4 Single Classical/Deterministic Approaches Classical methods give good results. Annealing Genetic Algorithm.Lagrange Relaxation. Traditionally the UC problem is to minimize the total production costs (TPC). Some heuristics are also applied. Dynamic Programming based Hopfield Neural Network etc. The Economic Dispatch is performed only on the feasible schedules.Algorithm.Literature Survey Unit commitment is the problem to determine the optimal subset of units to be used during the next 24 to 168 hours [1]. 2. The next section gives the review of several classical approaches which have been reported in the literature 2.5 percent saving of the operating fuel cost gives savings of millions of dollars per year for large utilities [4].Augmented Lagrange Hopfield Network. Tabu Search based Hybrid Particle Swarm Optimization. Enhanced Merit Order. The initial UC schedules are produced by priority list method and then modified using the problem specific heuristics to fulfill unit and system constraints.4. Memetic Algorithm seeded with Lagrange Relaxation.3 Unit commitment --. A 0. (operating fuel cost. 2. Priority List In 2003. Priority List based Evolutionary Algorithm. Lagrange Relaxation-Particle Swarm Optimization.

K. C. The computer time to produce a solution is small. The main concern was to determine the feasibility of using Dynamic Programming to solve the UCP. et al.4. This algorithm incorporates a number of special features and effectively deals with the control of problem size. The Dynamic Programming-Sequential Combinations (DPSC) and Dynamic Programming-Truncated Combinations (DP-TC) and Dynamic Programming-Sequential/Truncated Combinations (DPSTC). et al. When similar combinations of with the lowest accumulated cost is pursued further. L. P. T. D. emergency reserve and MUT and MDT down time constraints were incorporated. Storage requirements are reduced even more significantly. [16] proposed Stochastic Priority List (SPL) method. [18] presented a study of three different DP algorithms. Dynamic Programming In 1966. G. Bond. Lowery. et al. To achieve the computational time saving. In 1987. et al. 2. Results of the study show that simple. In addition to the usual upper and lower limits on unit outputs. Some heuristics are used to reduce search space and computational time. [19] presented a dynamic programming which is capable of solving the generation scheduling problem. The reduced search effort lowers run times by an order of magnitude compared with a mixed integer-linear programming approach relying mainly on constraint violations as a truncation mechanism.2. Snyder. Four methods were used to establish the savings and computer resource requirements. [17] proposed DP in solving UCP. Pang. straightforward constraints are adequate to produce a usable optimum operating policy. [20] proposed an approach to save computational time. Some initial feasible UC schedules are generated by Priority List method and priority based stochastic window system. S. is a combination of the DP-SC and DP-TC methods. In 1986. Senjyu. individual units were assigned status 10 . The solutions are guaranteed to be optimal and are obtained by using a state definition which includes the length of time a unit has been on or off. W. This information is required to assess the effect of present commitment decisions on future flexibility. The algorithm has been tested successfully on data for a small and medium sized thermal power system. In 1981.In 2006.

and the spinning reserve using fuzzy set notations. This approach features the classification of units into groups so as to minimize the number of unit combinations. The method incorporates start-up costs. et al. et al. In 1991. With these membership functions at hand. 2. [24] proposed a new approach based on branch-and-bound techniques. Ouyang. peaking. In 1988. This approach has been proved on a medium size utility for which sample results were presented. Z. Su. [25] proposed an extended and modified version of applying branch and bound technique for Integer Programming and treats the commitments of both hydro 11 . et al. a recursive algorithm for fuzzy dynamic programming is presented. The proposed fuzzy dynamic programming approach requires more computer time than the DP approach. The approach was implemented in an on-line energy management system. Hobbs. S. This approach saves predecessor options. 2. T. The method creates several states from each unique combination and links each state to one of the possible paths to that combination. A. presented a heuristic improvement of the truncated window DP and used a variable window size according to forecast load demand increments. MUT and MDT constraints. [22] developed a technique using fuzzy DP. fixed output.restriction in any given hour.4. Dillon. C. and must run units. C. spinning reserve. [21] developed an enhanced DP approach. I.3 Branch and Bound In 1983.4 Integer and Mixed Integer programming In 1978. A merit order list is formed which excludes all unavailable.4. [23]. Cohen. the total cost. Programming techniques are described which maximize efficiency. The corresponding experimental results show a considerable saving in the computation time. The developed algorithm is used to solve the unit UC of Taiwan power. In 1991. et al. et al. load demand. W. L. Subsequent combinations of units are formed by decommitting one unit at a time. The errors in the forecasted load are considered and membership functions are derived for the load demand.

In 2000. The results are compared with LR method. S. et al. In 2005. Numerous developments were envisaged. Given the schedules generated by Lagrangian iterations.and thermal systems. relaxation in constraint enforcement and allows the method to seek a practical solution. start up cost is modeled using linear variables. A. et al. 2. [26] presented a technique for refining the schedules obtained by Lagrangian method. The method is computationally practical for realistic system. The fuzzy formulation provides modeling flexibility. [27] formulated the price-based unit commitment problem based on the mixed integer programming method. The major obstacles are more computation time and memory requirement to solve large UC problems. The proposed PBUC solution is for a generating company having cascaded-hydro. and improved schedule was found by solving the mixed integer program. In this formulation. The present method constitutes a basis for the development of unit commitment programs using integer programming for practical use in electric utilities.5 Lagrange Relaxation Method In 1983. thermal. pump storage and combined-cycle. et al. B. 104generator system demonstrating its speed and robustness gained by using the LP technique. units. to make the algorithm flexible such as simultaneous management of pumping units. et al. [29] proposed a new implementation in solving UCP by Lagrangian relaxation method. Venkatesh. In 2007. The use of MILP technique makes the proposed solution method rigorous and fast. Li Tao. The method is tested on a 24 h. probabilistic determination of the 12 .4. [28] demonstrated advantages of using the fuzzy optimization model and presents fuzzy linear optimization formulation of UC using a mixed integer linear programming (MILP) routine. Merlin. Takriti. The method gives a significant improvement in terms of quality of the solution for large number of units. A five-generator system is additionally used to create a see-through example demonstrating advantages of using the fuzzy optimization model. The model was an integer program with non linear constraints and solved for optimal solution using branch and bound technique.

The algorithm incorporates other practical features such as boiler fire-up characteristics and non-linear ramp up sequences. In 1989. S. The algorithm. gives a reliable performance and low execution times. and finally ED is performed. Zhuang. In 1995. Virmani et al.L. et al. F. Baldick [33] formulated UCP in generalized form and solved using LR method. second a reserve-feasible dual solution is find. The algorithm in divided into three phases. [31] presented an LR method for large scale problem. 13 .spinning reserve. The algorithm was slower in solving the special cases of the generalized UCP than algorithms demonstrated by other authors. R. [32] presented a paper in which they provide an understanding of the practical aspects of the Lagrangian Relaxation methodology for solving the thermal UCP. Both spinning and time-limited reserve constraints are treated. et al. this approach makes no attempt of maximizing the dual function. In 1995. W. [30] proposed an approach to solve very large and complex UCP. presented. First the Lagrangian dual of the unit commitment is maximized with standard subgradient techniques. In contrast with the technique of Lagrangian Relaxation. Peterson. R. The proposed approach gives an estimate of suboptimality that indicates the closeness of the solution near to the optimum. et al. In 1987. On 100 units to be scheduled over 168 hours. [34] proposed a Lagrange Relaxation to incorporate unit minimum capacity and unit ramp rate constrains. This decomposition method used is flexible and Lagrange multiplier provides a new solution to the conventional problem. Nieva. In 1988. approximately solves the dual optimization problem. The approach has been tested for ten units for a time period of 24 hours. The proposed method is used in finding a feasible UC schedule considering a new approach for ramping constraints.

Murtaza. a novel fast straightforward method (SF). During the LR solution of the UCP two sets of lambdas are used. D. The first one. [36] proposed an enhanced adaptive Lagrangian relaxation (ELR). H. conventional Lagrange relaxation was applied in order to determine the unit commitment schedule neglecting transmission loss. Bakirtzis. Enhanced LR approach consists of heuristic search and adaptive LR. After the ALR the best feasible schedule is obtained.4.6 Straight Forward Method In 2007. et al. Finally. a two stage Lagrange relaxation was provided. is the Lagrange multiplier of the power balance equation in the economic dispatch problem. The results are then input to the proposed method. 2. In 2004. 14 .In 2000. [38] presented. [37] presented an algorithm for the unit commitment schedule using the Lagrange relaxation method by taking into account the transmission losses. Ongsakul. For better convergence and faster calculation. The total system production costs are less for the large scale system. et al. is assigned as a Lagrange multiplier (Lambda) to the UC power balance equations and second one. Although both set of lambdas represent marginal cost of electricity. The heuristic search is used to fine tune the schedule. This new approach decomposes the UCP into three sub-problems. The quadratic cost functions of units are linearized and hourly optimum solution of UC is obtained considering all constraints except the MUT and MDT constraints and then the MUT/MDT constraints are introduced by modifying the schedule obtained in the first step through a proposed novel optimization processing. Hosseini. W. S. [35] demonstrated the difference between the lambda values of the economic dispatch and the UCP based on economic interpretation of the Lagrangian Relaxation solution framework. and the unit commitment schedule including transmission losses was produced. In 2005. ALR is enhanced by introducing new 0-1 decisions. P. et al. The computational time is much less compared with others approaches. G. A. First. by using a new de-commitment algorithm the extra spinning reserve is minimized. et al.

[39] proposed an application of Secant method and Improved Pre-Prepared Power Demand (IPPD) table (based on the units having low minimum incremental cost) for solving the UCP. and is applied to generation unit commitment. Simulated Annealing. The method assumes no specific problem structures and is highly flexible in handling unit commitment constraints. Numerical results show an improvement in the quality of solution compared with other approaches. The problem is divided into two sub problems. the unit on/off scheduling and ED sub problem.5.1 Tabu search In 1998. expert system. AI methods like Neural Networks. et al. Initially. TSA is used to solve the combinatorial optimization sub problem while the quadratic programming is used to solve the EDP subproblem. 2. The SI techniques like PSO and ACO also gained prominence for solving UCP. 2. 15 . et al. A. Initial feasible UC schedules are generated randomly using new proposed rules. known as simulated annealing. [40] presented an approach based on the Tabu Search method.7 Secant Method In 2008.5 Non classical approaches The growing interest is the application of non classical approaches like Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Swarm Intelligence (SI) in solving the UCP. Genetic Algorithm. 2. and fuzzy logic are used to solve the UCP. et al. In the following section a survey of the AI and SI methods for UCP are presented.5. For solving large scale problems the convergence is in less iteration. [41] presented a general optimization method. F. Zhuang.4. Mantawy. Chandram. Numerical results on test systems of up to 100 units were reported.2. evolutionary programming. H. SA was used to generate feasible solutions randomly and moves among these solutions using a strategy leading to a global minimum with high probabilities. IPPD table obtains the unit 0-1 status information and then the optimal solution is achieved by Secant method. K.2 Simulated Annealing (SA) In 1990.

[47] demonstrated PL based heuristic to form initial UC schedules based on the given forecasted load. The dynamic ED method is used to incorporate the ramp rate constraints in the UCP. Y. This expert system will lead an inexperienced operator to a better unit schedule. [43] developed an enhanced SA-approach for solving the UCP by adopting mechanisms to ensure that the candidate solutions produced are feasible and satisfy all the constraints. S. the solutions are generated in the neighbor of the current one and the extent of perturbation of the solutions decreased with decreasing temperature. et al. The authors estimate that 300 rules will be required to satisfy all operational requirements. New rules for the tuning of the control parameters of the SA algorithm are also presented. [45] presented fuzzy UCP using the absolutely stochastic simulated annealing method. et al. et al. 2. During the solution process. In 1991. W Wong. A new expert system approach was used to handle short term UC problem.5. Saber.3 Expert System In 1988. K. SA is used for generator scheduling. A. In scheduling units an expert system based on consultant has been formulated. Simopoulos. et al.In 1998. A. In the proposed approach one of the previous schedules as the staring 16 . [42] presented a Simulated Annealing Algorithm (SAA) and proposed new rules for randomly generating initial feasible UC schedules. Numerical results show an improvement in the total production cost compared with other approaches. [46] presented in setting up an expert system which combines the knowledge of the unit commitment programmer and an experienced operator. H. et al. D. In 2006. SAA is used to solve the combinatorial optimization sub problem while the quadratic programming is used to solve the EDP subproblem. In 2006. The basic expert system used 56 rules for the experiments. [44] developed a new enhanced SA combined with a dynamic ED method. Mokhtari. S. N. In 1998. Y. Mantawy. Tong. S.

[49] explored the feasibility of using the Hopfield neural network to unit commitment in which a large number of inequality constraints are handled by the dedicated neural network instead of including them in the energy function. M. their outputs are adjusted according to the priority order in fuel cost per unit output. Tournament and Ranking was used as well as two options for Weight and Connections are combined for running the GA. [50] presented an improved Hopfield neural networks method. The units are divided into three categories the base. et al.point is used to find the new schedule that will satisfy the present load requirements. The computational time is less than two seconds. A new mapping process was used and a computational method for obtaining the weights and biases using a slack variable technique for handling inequality constraints. In 2000. In 1993. 2. Once the states of generators are determined. start-up and shutdown costs and MUT/MDT constraints have been taken into account. [48] presented a graphics package and a new heuristic method for unit commitment. A rule based approach is applied to implement PL scheme for modifying the previous schedule so that a sub-optimal feasible schedule can be obtained quickly. S. Li.5. In 1999. T. The back-propagation was used to train the weights. Sasaki. et al. Yalcinoz. The HFNN approach has been tested on a 3 unit and a 10 unit systems. et al. H. [51] used GA to evolve the weight and the interconnection of the neural network to solve the UC problem.4 Artificial Neural Network (ANN) In 1992. et al. Three selection methods Roulette Wheel. 17 . The principles of this method can be expanded to consider more complicated cases with additional constraints. transmission losses. Roulette Wheel has the best performance. Wong. medium and peak. Transmission capacity.

The algorithm has been tested on 26 generators. Test results clearly reveal the robustness and promise of the proposed approach. et al. operating constraints and load profile at each time period in the scheduling horizon.5. The method guarantees the production of solutions that do not violate system or unit constraints. A. [52] proposed an algorithm that uses the EP technique in which populations of initial population is generated randomly and then the solutions are evolved through selection. et al. The method relies on the selection and grading of the penalty functions to allow the fitness function to differentiate between good and bad solutions. D. [54] developed a forced mutation operator and the efficiency of the GA was improved significantly using this operator. X. competition. The approach was tested on a 10 unit system. In 1996. the effects of GA’s control variables on convergence were extensively studied. [56] presented Genetic Algorithm by using Varying Quality Function technique and adding problem specific operators. With the technique of varying quality function. 2.6 Genetic Algorithm (GA) In 1993. S. et al. O. Two different coding schemes were devised and tested. Orero. Dasgupta et al. S. the GA finally manages to locate 18 . and random changes. In 1996. It was observed that the two-point crossover operation is considerably more efficient than the single-point crossover commonly used in GAs In addition. In 1995. A. The genetic-based UC system evaluates the priority of the units dynamically considering the system parameters.5 Evolutionary Programming (EP) In 1999. et al. so long as there are enough generators available in the selection pool to meet the required load demand. [55] presented an enhanced genetic algorithm incorporating sequential decomposition logic for faster search mechanism Unit commitment constraints including ramp rates are considered. Ma.2. [53] presented a genetic approach for determining the priority order in the commitment of thermal units in power generation. Kazarlis.5. The coding was implemented in a binary form. K. Juste. The paper examined the feasibility of using genetic algorithms and reports some simulation results in near optimal commitment of thermal units.

The algorithm is applied to 100 units. New operators swap-mutation and swap-window hill-climb was implemented. In 2006. The search performance is improved through a window mutation. et al. [60] proposed a floating-point genetic algorithm (FPGA). The non linear MUT and MDT constraints are directly coded in the chromosome. [58] proposed a new method for hydrothermal systems. G. In 2002. A nonlinear transformation was used for fitness scaling. using new specialized operators. In 2003. C. [61] introduced a matrix real-coded genetic algorithm (MRCGA). The ICGA is robust and execution time is less than other approaches. Units are classified in several groups depending upon their MUT/MDT constraints. T. The proposed GA. population size. et al. The FPGA is also applicable for non-convex cost function. Senjyu. To handle MUT and MDT constraints encoding and decoding schemes are used. has demonstrated excellent performance in dealing with this kind of problem. et al. E. For every violated constraint. selection.the exact global solution. constraints. Dang. Gil. et al. The fitness function. To handle MUT/MDT constraints new mutation operators were introduced. crossover and mutation probabilities are characterized in detail. L. Sun. In 2004. New cross over operator. [59] presented a new solution based on an integer-coded genetic algorithm (ICGA). 19 . shift operator. A real number matrix representation of chromosome is used that can solve the UC problem through genetic operations. In 2006. in which the chromosome size is reduction compared to the binary coding. obtaining near-optimal solutions in reasonable times. a penalty term is added to the total cost. The initial population is generated base on load curve. [57] presented new genetic operator based on unit characteristic classification and intelligent technique for generating initial populations. In which a floating-point chromosome representation is used based on the forecasted load curve. et al. Loannis. The use of penalty functions is avoided because they distort the search space. and intelligent mutation operators were proposed.

The BPSO is used to solve the combinatorial unit on/off scheduling problem for operating fuel and transition costs.t the operating cost and computation time obtained by using fuzzy dynamic programming and other conventional methods like dynamic programming. L.5. B. 20 . Lagrangian relaxation methods. derating and line losses. For validation of the approach in respect of total production cost and computational time.5. T. It is claimed that this approach gives economical cost of operation. [65] presented an improved particle swarm optimization algorithm (IPSO) for UC which utilizes more particles information to control the process of mutation operation. C. et al. Z.8 Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) In 2003.The proposed new mechanism of chromosome repair guarantees that the UC schedule satisfies unit and system constraints. [66] presented a new approach for UCP named the iteration particle swarm optimization (IPSO). 2. For proper selection of parameters some new rules are also proposed. 2. Lee. Zhao. In 2006. Pandian. The proposed method improves the quality of solution in terms of total production cost and also improves the computation efficiency. et al. S. A standard 48 unit system has been tested for validation. 26 and 34 units have been performed. The ED subproblem is solved using the lambda iteration method for obtaining the total production cost. [64] proposed binary particle swarm optimization (BPSO). [62] formulated the fuzzy logic to the UCP. Numerical results are compared w. S. et al. [63] presented a fuzzy logic approach that is very useful to consider the uncertainty in the forecasted load curve. Gaing.r.7 Fuzzy logic In 1997. et al. In 2007. In 2004. Saneifard. Y. A comparison of results presented in the paper indicates that the use of fuzzy logic provides outcomes comparable to those of conventional dynamic programming. The proposed method combines LR technique to 0-1 variable. case studies on 10.

T. [69] proposed memory-bounded ant colony optimization (MACO). the decisions taken by the method. A Viana. The standard PSO is improved the using the priority list and heuristic search to improve the MUT and MDT constraints. when building a solution. et al. 2.Y. A. [67] proposed a new improved binary PSO (IBPSO). a set of cooperating agents called “ants” cooperates to find good unit schedules the ED sub-problem is solved by the λ-iteration method. [70] presented. an adaptive algorithmic framework based on another meta-heuristic principle (GRASP – Greedy Randomized Adaptive Search Procedure). which is inspired by the observation of the behaviors of real ant colonies. A heuristic is also incorporated to enhance local search. et al. The 10-100 units have been tested to validate the proposed approach. 2.In 2009. et al. In 2008. and is a new cooperative agent’s approach based on parallel search.5. Yuan. et al. The aim of the hybrid methods is to improve the performance of single approaches.6 Hybrid approaches Hybrid approaches are also used to solve many difficult engineering problems. This dynamic learning-process often leads to very good solutions. The proposed approach is applicable for large number of units and solves the computer memory limit requirements. [68] proposed.5. A brief review of different hybrid approaches which have been reported in the literature is presented in this section. are somehow adapted according to decisions previously taken. Saber. 2.9 Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) In 2003. Numerical performance shows that the proposed approach is superior in terms of low total production cost and short computational time compared with other published results. In the proposed approach. X. The philosophy applied is slightly different from standard meta-heuristics.10 Greedy Randomized Adaptive Search Procedure (GRASP) In 2003. The objective of hybrid of two or more methods is to speed up the convergence and to get better quality of solution compared with single approaches. 21 . Sum-im. ant colony search algorithm (ACSA).

M. et al. The training of each load takes approximately eight to ten minutes. The proposed system limits the number of constraints and also checks the possible constraint violations in the generated schedule. P. D. The ANN is used to solve the unit scheduling sub problem and the SA is 22 . [72] proposed a multi-stage Neural Network-expert system approach. H. In 1992. et al [73] described a hybrid expert system dynamic programming approach. The approach converges into global minimum for a given range of space. In 2000. Kothari. Ouyang. Z. et al. Shyh-Jier. The computational efficiency is more compared with other methods. Through inference the feasible UC schedule is obtained. Z. Case studies are performed on 26 unit system. In 2000. A 35 training pattern are used in the study. The expert system communicates with the operator in a friendly manner and hence the various program parameters can be adjusted to have an optima1. Wong. Nayak. This approach prevents the stagnation during training. R. Ouyang et al. In 1997. [71] utilized neural networks to generate a pre-schedule according to the forecasted load curve. H. The output scheduling of the usual dynamic programming is enhanced by supplementing it with the rule based expert system. The proposed approach significantly reduced the computational time.In 1992. et al. The trained network performs adjustments in the schedule to achieve the optimal solution at the post processor stages. At the initial stage a set of feasible UC schedules are generated by genetic-enhanced neural networks. et al. [76] proposed a hybrid of feed forward neural network and the simulated annealing. A load pattern matching scheme is performed at the pre-processor stage. [75] presented a technique in which genetic algorithm is evolved to intelligently decide the initial weights and the connections in the ANN. [74] proposed genetic algorithm based neural network and dynamic programming approach for UCP. In the second stage these schedules are optimized by using the DP approach. In 1995. The evolving neural network has lower training error compared to neural network with random initial weights. operationally acceptable schedule.

Cheng. 26. The results in terms of total production cost and computational time are better than single approaches like DP and LR. Results shown are acceptable at this early stage. The method improves the computational time of the Simulated Annealing and the quality of solution of Genetic Algorithm and gives near optimal solution of a large scale system. and 34 units have been tested and the results are compared with other approaches. better in convergence. In 2003. Problem formulation. C. 23 . Cheng. [81] presented a neural based tabu search (NBTS) method. Systems consisting of 10. A set of inputs based on the forecasted load curve and corresponding UC schedules as outputs satisfying the system and unit constraints are used to train the network. et al. The implementations of standard GA or MA are not competitive compared with the traditional methods of DP and LR. [77] presented an application of Genetic Algorithms and Lagrangian Relaxation (LRGA) method. [79] presented memetic algorithm. In 2003. and LR is efficient and effective for solving large UC problems. The method is easy to implement.used to solve the ED sub problem. The algorithm is based on the short term memory procedure of the tabu search method. Valenzuela. J. O. P. representation and the numerical results for a 10 unit are presented. A. T. Ting. et al. Rajan. an MA incorporated with LR proves to be superior to other approaches on large scale problems. et al. In 2002. P. [80] proposed a Hybrid Particle Swarm Optimization (HPSO). a hybrid of GA. C. The AG is a hybrid of GA into the SA to improve the performance of the SA approach. A reduction in computational time is achieved by this approach. In 2002. C. [78] proposed the application of the annealing–genetic (AG) algorithm. et al. et al. In 2000. The proposed approach incorporates GA into LR method to improve the performance of LR and to update the Lagrangian multipliers. However. C.

In 2004. [85] introduced an application of hybrid-PSO and sequentialquadratic programming technique (SQP) guiding the tabu search (TS). Hybrid of Simulated annealing. In 2005. [83] developed and demonstrated a novel ant colony optimization algorithm with random perturbation behavior (RPACO). Shi. et al. T. H. To reduce the dimensionality problem and to improve the UC schedules the neighborhood solutions are divided into subneighborhoods.A. Chusanapiputt. Aruldoss. Sriyanyong. The nonlinear ED subproblem is solved using the hybrid PSO-SQP technique. In the proposed work. The unit scheduling problem is solved using an improved random-perturbation scheme. [86] presented Parallel Relative Particle Swarm Optimization (PRPSO) and LR for a large-scale system. D. L. et al. In 2005. To solve the UCP an evolutionary algorithm with problem specific heuristic and genetic operators has been employed In 2004. A simple procedure for generating initial feasible UC schedules is proposed for the TS method. [84] presented a hybrid of PSO and LR. at al. S. In 2005. [88] presented a solution model using fuzzy logic. UCP is divided into sub problems and each sub problem is solved using DP. P. Balci. Srinivasan. The comparison of results shows that the proposed approach uses less computational time and gives good quality solutions. particle swarm optimization and sequential quadratic programming 24 .A Victoire. the PSO was used to adjust the lagrange multipliers in order to improve the performance of lagrange relaxation method. The approach is based on the combination of colony optimization and stochastic mechanism is developed for the solution of optimal UC with probabilistic spinning reserve. et al. In 2005. H. PSO is used to update the Lagrangian multipliers. T. et al.In 2004. [87] proposed PSO based LR method for optimal setting of Lagrange multipliers. [82] proposed an efficient algorithm for aiding unit commitment decisions. et al.

where by the term hybrid meant the combination of PSO and GA. et al. Nasser. Y. In 2006. [91] presented a twofold simulated annealing (twofold-SA) method.N. In 2007. et al. whereas ALHN can properly handle generation ramp rate limits. V. FAPSO precisely tracks a changing schedule. Numerical results demonstrated show that the PSO-B-SA approach can perform well compared with the other solutions. A. A hybrid of SA and fuzzy logic is used to obtain SA probabilities from fuzzy membership function. S. Saber. Based on the diversity of 25 . In 2007. et al. In 2007. O. T. In 2006. [93] proposed a fuzzy adaptive Particle Swarm Optimization (FAPSO) for UCP. The ALHN is a continuous Hopfield network and its energy function is based on augmented Lagrangian function. [89] introduced a hybrid particle swarm optimization (HPSO) which is a combination of binary and real coded particle swarm optimization (BPSO and RCPSO). [90] proposed an enhanced merit order (EMO) and augmented Lagrange Hopfield network (ALHN) for solving hydrothermal scheduling (HTS) problem with pumped-storage units. Results indicate a low total production cost and low execution time compared with other approaches. The proposed approach is based on merit order approach enhanced by heuristic search based algorithms. [92] presented hybrid particle swarm optimization based simulated annealing (PSO-B-SA) approach. The term “hybrid particle swarm optimization” was first mentioned by S. Saber. EMO is efficient in unit scheduling. Y. The initial feasible UC schedules are generated by a priority list method and are modified by de-composed SA using a bit flipping operator. Ting. Dieu et al. et al.technique (hybrid SA-PSO-SQP) is used to schedule the generating units based on the fuzzy logic decisions. The unit scheduling sub problem is solved by using binary PSO and ED sub problem is solved by using real valued PSO. and time coupling constraints. et al. A. The BPSO is used to solve unit scheduling problem and RPSO is used to solve the ED subproblem. Naka.

Genetic Algorithm. S.7 Unit Commitment --. have the ability to search for near global and can deal easily with non linear constraints. Handling of non convex fuel cost function 4. Minimum up and down time ii. Emission iv. because they are able to solve convex and non-convex fuel cost functions. The DP methods are based on enumeration and PL.fitness the fuzzy adaptive criterion is used for the PSO inertia weight. Using fuzzy IF/THEN rules the weights are dynamically adjusted. The generator scheduling problem is solved using DP and generation scheduling problem is solved using Hopfield neural network. Security Discussion The global optimal solution of the UCP can be obtained by Brute Force (complete enumeration) technique. The proposed approach solves the UCP in two steps. Transmission iii. In case of large-scale problem these single approaches consume long 26 . S. Handling of constraints such as: i. 2. Generation of infeasible solutions 5. Integer programming (IP) and Mixed-integer programming (MIP) require considerable computational efforts when dealing with large-scale problems. High dimensionality 2. Priority list (PL) methods are highly heuristic but very fast and give UC solutions with high total production cost. and Particle Swarm Optimization etc. The non classical approaches such as Evolutionary Computation. but suffer from the curse of dimensionality.8 1.Issues and Bottlenecks The issues and bottlenecks in the UCP may be listed as: 2. The main problem with Lagrangian relaxation (LR) method is the difficulty in obtaining the feasible UC schedules. Handling of cost base and profit base unit commitment 3. In 2007. which is not applicable for a power system having large number of units due to its long computational time. Kumara. et al. attract much attention. [94] developed DP based direct Hopfield computation method.

gives solution in an acceptable computation time and can accommodate more constraints. 27 . flexible and efficient tool for UCP. 4. The potential avenues for further exploration may be listed as: 1. 6. Hence. 8. Hybrid methodology is the useful tool for efficient solution by exploiting the strength of single classical approaches. it is observed that the hybrid techniques reduce the search space are more efficient and have better quality of solutions for small and large scale problems. Exploration of fast and efficient method for utility system. Hybrid models based on the integration of classical and non classical approaches for enhancing the computational efficiency and handling of non-convex cost function for the UC problem. The main difficulty is their sensitivity on the choice of parameters. 5. Exploration of new operators for MUT and MDT constraint handling. To reduce the high dimensionality of the UCP. 2. How to satisfy MUT and MDT constraints. 3.computational time. How to generate initial feasible schedules considering spinning reserve requirements. Thus enhancing existing classical and non classical optimization approaches and exploring new single and hybrid approached to solve unit commitment problem has great importance. PSO is new. Among the hybrid approaches the Swarm Intelligence techniques are new to apply to the UC problem. there is an incentive to explore hybrid algorithms. and non classical approaches. From the selected above mentioned literature review. 7. Exploration of PSO based approaches.

- lect_lgUploaded byTauseef Ahmad
- 580S-2Uploaded byIrahan Otoniel Jose
- Reliability-Based Structural Design Optimization for Nonlinear Structures in OpenSeesUploaded bymgrubisic
- KTUploaded byahmedemak
- Airline Crew SchedulingUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- Practice 2Uploaded byapi-3737025
- Traffic Signal OptimizationUploaded byAmbrish Singh
- Sparse Coding - An OverviewUploaded byMuhammad Rizwan
- Risk Assesment Methology for Toxic Chemicals EvaporationUploaded byManuel Pita Bermúdez
- The Dynamic Berth Allocation Problem for a Container PortUploaded byMadhuShakthi
- CHAPTER 3.docxUploaded byharinima
- A 03940116Uploaded byIOSRJEN : hard copy, certificates, Call for Papers 2013, publishing of journal
- power economyUploaded byWang Sol
- Operation Management-NPTEL-Lec4Uploaded byRangith Ramalingam
- Lagrange Multipliers BasicsUploaded byVictor Alves
- NpsF8E7.TmpUploaded bySaad Hussein
- Thesis ElAbd Uw-PSOUploaded byAnonymous s8OrImv8
- Genetic Algorithm for the Design of Cellularmanufacturing System Integrating Structural and OperationalparametersUploaded byasadtouqeier
- Economic Dispatch ControlUploaded byTirumalesh Reddy
- 202-2073-1-PBUploaded byAhcene Bouzida
- CSO.pdfUploaded bytata3
- UCUploaded bySambit Dash
- dense 3D.pdfUploaded bySara Namdarian
- Full and Partial Class Relevant GenesUploaded bychithrasreemod
- Application of the Genetic Algorithm...Uploaded bykompanija1
- 1Uploaded byAntriksh Bahuguna
- GA Resefdarch Article 1Uploaded byashoku2
- 2Chapter_2 SalvatoreUploaded byraqi148
- PSO(Particle Swam Optimization)Uploaded bysandeep_036
- AI.pdfUploaded byMahmoud Abdelaziz

- المشرف هو حلقة الوصل مابين الإدارة وبين العمالUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- AIAA-2010-4224.pdfUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- Wbest03 Union AirUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- 097Uploaded byMohamed Mansour
- 381 BorshUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- Intro Sal 2 Assignment 1Uploaded byMohamed Mansour
- wbest04_WyndorUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- Wbest03 Save ItUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- R-T4-UAV.pdfUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- Priority Rules IJPE2010Uploaded byMohamed Mansour
- 026_Chapter 5 _L19_(03-10-2013).pdfUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- 9-2_Solving the Multi-Resource Constrained Project Scheduling Problem Using Ant Colony OptimizationUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- Sheet Metal.pdfUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- Inventory.docxUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- 027-032_for_webUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- 29 ProductUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- Saudi Research KpiUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- 15-02319Erik OlofssonRapportUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- Han1500 ManualUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- 6 336 1048 1 LE Ok ImportanttttttttttttttttttttttttttUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- 027-032_for_webUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- Copy of List8432-6029Uploaded byMohamed Mansour
- Copy of List8432-6029Uploaded byMohamed Mansour
- gen_naca_sym.mUploaded byMohamed Mansour
- 19Uploaded byMohamed Mansour