Received June 14, 2019, accepted July 2, 2019, date of publication July 9, 2019, date of current version August

2, 2019.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2927574

A Differential Evolution Algorithm Based on

Multi-Population for Economic Dispatch
Problems With Valve-Point Effects
XUEPING LI , HONGJIE ZHANG, AND ZHIGANG LU
School of Electrical Engineering, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China
Corresponding author: Xueping Li (lixueping@ysu.edu.cn)
This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 61473246, in part by the Natural
Science Foundation of Hebei Province under Grant E2015203294, and in part by the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation under Grant
2014M551049.

ABSTRACT Economic dispatch (ED) problem with valve-point effects of generation units is a non-smooth
and non-convex problem. This paper presents a differential evolution algorithm based on multi-population
(MPDE) to solve ED problems with valve-point effects. The proposed MPDE algorithm employs the
evolutional methodology of multiple populations to overcome the limitations of the traditional differential
evolution algorithm. In multiple populations, each population has its mutation strategy and parameters to
enhance the searching ability. Moreover, information exchange among multiple populations to increase
the diversity of individuals in a single population. In addition, the algorithm also introduces the normal
distribution function to dynamically adjust the scaling factor and crossover rate to accelerate convergence
speed. The proposed algorithm is tested on the 13-, 40-, 80-, and 140-unit test systems. The simulation
results show that the MPDE algorithm can achieve much smaller variances compared with other intelligent
algorithms. The proposed algorithm has significant performance in accuracy for solving economic dispatch
problems with valve-point effects.

INDEX TERMS Differential evolution, multi-population, economic dispatch problems, valve-point effects.

I. INTRODUCTION In order to overcome the limitations of conventional

Economic dispatch (ED) is a typical optimization problem
of economic operation and optimal dispatch, which aims
to improve the operation economy and reliability of power
system effectively. The purpose of ED problem is to optimize
output power of each unit and minimize power system gen-
erating cost. When considering the valve-point effects [1],
the characteristic curve of generation unit becomes nonlinear.
In addition, there are a great many power generation units
in the power system., which can increase the difficulty of
the calculation and easily fall into local optimum solutions.
Because economic dispatch has a series of problems such as
non-linearity, non-convexity and multi-dimensionality, some
mathematical methods cannot solve ED problem well, for
example, linear programming algorithm (LP) [2], quadratic
programming algorithm (QP) [3] and dynamic programming
algorithm (DP) [4].
The associate editor coordinating the review of this manuscript and
approving it for publication was Wei Wei.
mathematical methods, many researchers focus on heuris-
tic intelligence optimization algorithms including swarm
intelligence algorithms that simulate the behavior of bio-
logical swarms, evolutionary algorithms that simulate the
evolution of biological organisms and simulated ecosystem
algorithms. In recent years, some researchers have used
these heuristic algorithms to solve ED problems, such as
differential evolution algorithm (DE) [5], particle swarm
optimization (PSO) [6], ant colony optimization algorithm
(ACO) [7], genetic algorithm (GA) [8], simulated anneal-
ing (SA) [9], Hopfield neural network (HNN) [10], tabu
search (TS) [11], bacterial foraging (BF) [12], cuckoo search
algorithm (CS) [13], bee colony optimization (BCO) [14],
and bio-geography based optimization (BBO) [15]. For
the purpose of improving the global optimization ability
and search efficiency, many researchers developed a vari-
ety of modification and hybridization of these intelligent
methods. On the basis of the traditional cuckoo search
algorithm (CS), Zhao et al. [16] added the adaptive step

VOLUME 7, 2019 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. For more information, see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 95585

size and a neighbor strategy to form the MCSA algorithm.
Cai et al. [17] proposed a chaotic particle swarm optimiza-
tion algorithm (CPSO), which combines particle swarm opti-
mization algorithm (PSO), adaptive weighting factor and
fusion chaotic local search optimization method to solve ED
problem. Adarsh et al. [18] proposed a bat algorithm that
uses chaotic sequences to enhance its performance, called
the chaotic bat algorithm (CBA). Park et al. [19] applied
the dynamic search space reduction strategy to the PSO
to form the MPSO algorithm that speeds up the optimiza-
tion process. Jadoun et al. [20] proposed a new Modulated
Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm (SMPSO). Unlike
MPSO, SMPSO introduces a truncated sinusoidal contraction
function to change the particle velocity for a larger search
range. Chaturvedi et al. [21] introduced a time varying
acceleration coefficient to PSO algorithm (PSO_TVAC) to
improve the local and global search efficiency and stabil-
ity of PSO. He et al. [22] applied the differential evolu-
tion algorithm (DE) and sequential quadratic programming
(SQP) techniques to the GA algorithm to form the HGA.
In the HGA algorithm, DE and SQP adjust the GA opti-
mized solution. Xiong et al. [23] proposed a multi-strategy
ensemble biogeography-based optimization (MsEBBO) to
effectively balance the global exploration and the local
exploitation.
The differential evolution algorithm (DE) is an intelli-
gent optimization algorithm that simulates the evolution of
natural organisms, which was proposed by Storn and Price
in 1995 when studying the Chebyshev polynomial fitting
problem [24]. The DE algorithm has a strong search abil-
ity, so it has been improved by many some researchers.
Draa et al. [25] proposed a sinusoidal differential evolu-
tion (SinDE), which uses the new sinusoidal formulas to
automatically adjust the scaling factor and the crossover rate
to balanced global search and local search. Mohamed [26]
presented an improved differential evolution (IDE) algorithm.
The algorithm introduces a new triangular mutation rule and
adopts a restart mechanism to overcome premature conver-
gence. Li et al. [27] designed a new framework that named
HMJCDE by combining MJADE and MCoDE. They are
operated alternatively according to the improvement rate of
the fitness value. Mohamed and Mohamed [28] presented
adaptive guided differential evolution algorithm (AGDE) that
introduces a new mutation scheme to maintain effectively
the balance between the global search and local search abil-
ities. Cui et al. [29] presented an adaptive multiple-elites-
guided composite differential evolution algorithm with a
shift mechanism (AMECoDEs), the purpose of this shift
mechanism is to solve the problems of search stagnation
and premature convergence. Wu et al. [30] proposed a
multi-population based on framework (MPF) to realize the
ensemble of multiple DE variants to derive a new algorithm
named EDEV. Mohamed et al. [31] presented a new semi-
parameter adaptation approach to effectively adapt the value
of the scaling factor of the differential evolution algorithm to
enhance search capability. In recent years, some researchers
95586
X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects
have improved on the basis of the traditional DE algorithm
and used the improved algorithm to solve the ED problem.
Amjady and Sharifzadeh [32] presented a modified differ-
ential evolution algorithm (MDE), where the mutation factor
and the crossover rate are dynamically adjusted, and the
mutant vector is produced by two mutation operators and a
modified repair operation regulating variables. Bhattacharya
and Chattopadhyay [33] introduced a hybrid technique com-
bining differential evolution with biogeography-based opti-
mization (DE/BBO), which is a combination of DE and BBO
to improve the quality of solution and convergence speed.
Roy et al. [34] proposed a new hybrid difference algorithm
(HCR-DE), which combines DE with CRO and utilizes the
advantages of HCR and DE to improve the convergence
speed. Niknam et al. [35] proposed a hybrid algorithm which
combines variable DE with fuzzy adaptive particle swarm
optimization (FAPSO-VDE) to solve the ED problem with
valve-point effects. Zou et al. [36] presented an improved
differential evolution algorithm (IDE), where randomiza-
tion is incorporated into IDE to overcome the premature
convergence.
Srinivasa Reddy and Vaisakh [37] proposed a hybrid shuf-
fled differential evolution algorithm (SDE), which combines
the advantages of hybrid hopping algorithm and differential
evolution algorithm, and designed a new mutation strat-
egy: DE/Memeplexbest/2. The algorithm divides the pop-
ulation into several subpopulations, each subpopulation is
updated by DE/Memeplexbest/2, and after a certain number
of predefined memetic evolutions, all individuals are col-
lected from each subpopulation and shuffled. Wu et al. [38]
proposed a multi-population ensemble differential evolu-
tion algorithm (MPEDE). The population is divided into
three smaller indicator subpopulations of the same size
and a larger reward subpopulation. The three indicator
subpopulations use different mutation strategies, and the
reward subpopulation selects the best mutation strategy
among the three populations for mutation operation. This
paper proposes a multi-population differential evolution
algorithm (MPDE), and each population adopts different
mutation strategies. In the process of evolution, informa-
tion exchanges among the three populations. SDE, MPEDE
and MPDE algorithms all introduce the concept of multi-
population, but there are some differences in some respects.
For example, the three algorithms are different in the selec-
tion of mutation strategies. MPDE chooses three different
mutation strategies: DE/rand/1, DE/rand/2 and DE/rand-
to-best/1. The three indicator populations in MPEDE
select DE/rand/1, DE/current-to-best/1 and DE/current-to-
rand/1 respectively. All subpopulations in the SDE algorithm
use the DE/Memeplexbest/2 mutation strategy to update indi-
viduals. In addition, in order to improve the diversity of
individuals in the single population, MPDE algorithm uses
a multi-population learning strategy, in which multiple pop-
ulations can learn and exchange information with each other.
Das et al. [39] used a linearly decreasing strategy to adjust
the scaling factor. Qin et al. [40] introduced the distribution
VOLUME 7, 2019
X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects

function to control parameters in the SaDE algorithm. A. INITIALIZATION

The scaling factor satisfies the distribution with a mean There are multiple individuals in the population, and each
of 0.5 and a standard deviation of 0.3. The crossover rate individual can be considered as a solution in the search space.
satisfies the distribution with a mean of σ and the standard If there are NP individuals in the population, the population
deviation of 0.1. The σ is adjusted every other period. Zhang can be expressed as:
and Sanderson [41] proposed the JADE algorithm, in which n o
the scaling factor and crossover rate are adaptively adjusted Pt = xmt |xmt = (xm,1
t
, xm,2
t
, xm,3
t
, · · · , xm,D
t
)T ,
according to the search experience during the evolution pro- m = 1, 2, · · · , NP (1)
cess. Ali and Torn [42] keep the crossover rate unchanged
in DE algorithm and adjust the scaling factor dynamically where t is the current number of evolutions; Pt is the popula-
according to the fitness of individuals in the current popu- tion at the t − th generation; xmt is the m-th individual vector;
lation. The magnitude of scaling factor and the magnitude D is the number of dimensions of the individual vector.
of crossover rate have a large impact on the performance The initial population needs to cover the entire search
of the DE algorithm at different stages of evolution. Based space as much as possible, so the algorithm uses a uniformly
on this, the linear decrement and increment method are used distributed random function to generate the initial solutions.
0 is calculated as follows:
xm.n
to dynamically adjust the mean value of the normal distri-
0
bution function of the algorithm parameters. This method xm,n = xnmin + rand(0, 1) × (xnmax − xnmin ) (2)
can provide appropriate mean value of the parameters for 0 is the value in the n-th dimension of the individual
individuals of the population in different evolutionary peri- where xm.n
ods, and at each iteration, the parameters of individuals in m; rand(0, 1) is a uniformly distributed random number in
the population will be generated randomly according to the the interval (0, 1); xnmax is the maximum boundary value of
current means and standard deviations, which increases the the n-th dimension of the individual and xnmin is the minimum
diversity of parameters and is conducive to the convergence boundary value of the n-th dimension of the individual.
of the population to the optimal solution. Compared with the
B. MUTATION OPERATION
existing studies, the salient contributions of this paper may be
listed as below: In the DE, the mutation operation is the creation of a mutation
vector for each individual of the current population by a
1) A multi-population strategy is proposed. Different random perturbation method. The differential evolution algo-
mutation strategies and parameters combinations in rithm maintains the diversity of the population through muta-
each population will produce different search charac- tion operation. The most widely used DE mutation strategies
teristics. Multi-population strategy combines different are shown as follows [2], [43]:
mutation strategies skillfully to enhance the searching DE/rand/1:
ability.
2) A learning strategy among populations was designed. vtm = xrt1 + Fmt × (xrt2 − xrt3 ) (3)
This strategy promotes information exchange among
DE/rand/2:
populations to increases the diversity of individuals in
the single population, and avoid the single population vtm = xrt1 + Fmt × (xrt2 − xrt3 ) + Fmt × (xrt4 − xrt5 ) (4)
falling into local optimum solution.
DE/best/1:
3) The normal distribution function is applied to dynam-
ically adjust the scaling factor and crossover rate to vtm = xbest
t
+ Fmt × (xrt1 − xrt2 ) (5)
accelerate convergence speed.
DE/best/2:
4) In the test of 13-, 40-, 80- and 140- unit test systems,
the MPDE algorithm can converge to the optimal value vtm = xbest
t
+ Fmt × (xrt1 − xrt2 ) + Fmt × (xrt3 − xrt4 ) (6)
and has a smaller standard deviation.
DE/current-to-best/1:
This paper is organized as follows: Section II describes the
traditional differential evolution algorithm. Section III pro- vtm = xmt + Fmt × (xbest
t
− xmt ) + Fmt × (xrt1 − xrt2 ) (7)
poses the MPDE algorithm. Section IV implements MPDE DE/rand-to-best/1:
algorithm to solve the ED problem. Section V is dedicated to
simulation results and analysis. Section VI summarizes the vtm = xrt1 + Fmt × (xbest
t
− xrt1 ) + Fmt × (xrt2 − xrt3 ) (8)
conclusion of this work. where vtm (the donor vector) represents the mutant vector of
individual m at the t − th generation; r1 , r2 , r3 , r4 , r5 are five
II. THE TRADITIONAL DE ALGORITHM random integers in the range [1, Np ] and r1 6 = r2 6 = r3 6=
In the DE algorithm, there are four main operating proce- t
r4 6 = r5 ; xbest is the individual vector with the best fitness
dures: initialization, mutation operation, crossover operation in the current population at the t − th generation; Fmt is the
and selection operation. scaling factor of individual m at the t − th generation.

VOLUME 7, 2019 95587

 X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects

C. CROSSOVER OPERATION
xmt generates vtm through mutation operation, and the DE
algorithm performs crossover operation based on xmt and vtm
to generate utm (the trial vector). Compare the random number
and the crossover rate to generate each dimension of the trial
vector. The updating equation is given by:
(
vt If rand(0, 1) ≤ CRtm or n = nrand
t
um,n = m,n t
(9)
xm,n Otherwise
where rand(0, 1) is a uniformly distributed random number
in the interval (0, 1); nrand is a random integer in the interval
[1, D]; CRtm is the crossover rate of individual m at the t − th
generation.

D. SELECTION OPERATION
The DE algorithm uses the greedy selection method to per- FIGURE 1. The framework of population division.

form the selection operation. By comparing the fitness func-

tion values corresponding to the xmt and the vtm , the vector with
better fitness value is selected as the next generation of indi-
vidual. Therefore, the selection operation can be defined as:
( and local search. The DE/best/1 (5) and DE/best/2 (6) muta-
utm f utm ≤ f xmt



t+1
xm = t (10)
xm Otherwise
The above is the four steps of the traditional DE algorithm.
III. THE MPDE ALGORITHM
In this paper, a differential evolution algorithm based on
multi-population (MPDE) is proposed, the MPDE algorithm
improves the traditional DE algorithm in the two aspects.
A. MULTI-POPULATION CO-EVOLUTION
The core of the MPDE algorithm is the multi-population
co-evolution. In this paper, a multi-population strategy is
designed for the DE algorithm, and each population uses
different mutation strategies. In order to increase the diversity
of the single population, multiple populations can learn from
each other by exchanging information.
1) THE MULTI-POPULATION DIVISION STRATEGY
Fan and Zhang have proposed differential evolution algo-
rithms for a variety of different mutation strategies [3].
Different mutation strategies have different search charac-
teristics. Based on this, this paper sets up three equal-sized
populations and each population adopts different mutation
strategies to perform the mutation operation, as shown in
Figure 1.
pop1, pop2 and pop3 contain the same number of indi-
viduals, and each population has NP individuals. The MPDE
algorithm assigns different mutation strategies to the cor-
responding population. pop1 uses DE/rand/1 (3) mutation
strategy that is the most commonly used, all individuals in the
mutation strategy formula are randomly generated, so there
is no specific search direction. The DE/rand/2 (4) mutation
strategy is applied to pop2. The DE/rand/2 strategy has rela-
tively good stability for disturbance, and strong global search
ability. pop3 adopts DE/rand-to-best/1 (8) mutation strategy,
which has a relatively balanced performance in global search
tion strategies are based on the optimal individual vector to
perform mutation operation, so it is easy to fall into local
optimum for complex problems. The DE/current-to-best/1
(7) mutation strategy is not stable enough to solve complex
problems and has poor robustness.
2) INFORMATION EXCHANGE AMONG POPULATIONS
In the MPDE algorithm, we use qm to track the num-
ber of consecutive failures of individual m during evolu-
tion. If f (um ) ≤ f (xm ), the individual m completes an
update, qm = 0. If f (um ) > f (xm ), the individual m fails
to update, qm = qm + 1. The formula is expressed as
follows:
(
0 If f (um ) ≤ f (xm )
qm = (11)
qm + 1 Otherwise
In this paper, the value Qt that allows the individual to
continuously fail is set. Information exchange among pop-
ulations can neither be too frequent or too less. It is impor-
tant to choose the suitable Qt for the population to evolve.
In the early stage of evolution, due to the better individual
diversity of the single population, the number of consec-
utive failures of individuals is small. In the later stage of
evolution, the individual differences of the single population
become smaller, and the number of consecutive failures of
individuals will increase. This paper adopts a nonlinear incre-
mental method to dynamically adjust Qt . Qt is computed as
follows:
t 3.5
Qt = Qmin + (Qmax − Qmin ) × ( ) (12)
tmax
where Qt is the number of times individuals is allowed to fail
consecutively in the t − th generation; Qmax is the maximum
value of Qt and Qmax = 18; Qmin is the minimum value of

95588 VOLUME 7, 2019

X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects

FIGURE 2. The schematic diagram of the MPDE algorithm.

Qt and Qmin = 5; t is the current number of iterations; tmax If the individual m belongs to the population pop2,
is the maximum iteration number. the updating equation is given by:
For the purpose of increasing the individual diversity of
the single population, individuals can select not only pater- vtm
nal individual vectors in their own population, but also the (
x t + Fmt × (xrt2 − xrt3 ) + Fmt × (xrt4 − xrt5 ) If qm ≤ Qt
paternal individual vectors in other populations to perform = rt1
the mutation operation. When qm ≤ Qt , all paternal indi- xj1 + Fmt × (xjt2 − xjt3 ) + Fmt × (xjt4 − xjt5 ) Otherwise
vidual vectors of individual m have to be selected from (14)
its own population. When qm > Qt , the target vector is
selected in the population to which individual m belong, the where r1 , r2 , r3 , r4 , r5 are five random integers in the range
other individual vectors are selected randomly in the three [NP + 1, 2NP ] and r1 6 = r2 6 = r3 6 = r4 6 = r5 ; j1 is
populations. one random integer in the range [NP + 1, 2NP ]; j2 , j3 , j4 , j5
If the individual m belongs to the population pop1, are four different random integers in the range [1, 3NP ] and
the donor vector vtm can be described as follows: j1 6 = j2 6 = j3 6 = j4 6 = j5 .
( If the individual m belongs to the population pop3, the for-
x t + Fmt × (xrt2 − xrt3 ) If qm ≤ Qt mula is expressed as follows:
vm = rt1
t
(13)
xj1 + Fmt × (xjt2 − xjt3 ) Otherwise
vtm
where r1 , r2 , r3 are three random integers in the range [1, NP ], (
t −x t )+F t × (x t −x t ) If q ≤ Qt
x t +Fmt ×(xbest m
and r1 6 = r2 6 = r3 ; j1 is one random integer in the range = rt1 r1 m r2 r3
t −x t )+F t × (x t −x t ) Otherwise
[1, NP ]; j2 , j3 are two random integers in the range [1, 3NP ], xj1 +Fmt × (xbest j1 m j2 j3
and j1 6 = j2 6 = j3 . (15)

VOLUME 7, 2019 95589


FIGURE 3. The flow chart of MPDE algorithm in solving ED problem.
TABLE 1. The parameters of the MPDE algorithm for solving the unit ED
problems.
TABLE 2. Input parameters and the brief introduction to test cases.
where r1 , r2 , r3 are three random integers in the range [2NP +
1, 3NP ] and r1 6 = r2 6 = r3 ; j1 is one random integer in the
range [2NP + 1, 3NP ]; j2 , j3 are two random integers in the
t
range [1, 3NP ] and j1 6 = j2 6 = j3 ; xbest is the best individual
vector with the best fitness in the population pop3.
Individuals of different populations can learn from indi-
viduals in other populations, and this information exchange
95590
X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects
FIGURE 4. The convergence characteristics for case 1.
TABLE 3. Output power of generators in the best result for the case 1.
FIGURE 5. The convergence characteristics for case 2.
mechanism enhances the search ability of the single popula-
tion. Figure 2 shows the schematic diagram of the exchange
among populations. This information exchange mechanism
has two characteristics. On the one hand, it makes the sin-
gle population have certain independence, and exchanging
information too frequently among populations will cause a
VOLUME 7, 2019
X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects

TABLE 4. The results obtained by different intelligent algorithms in solving case 1.

VOLUME 7, 2019 95591


TABLE 4. (Continued) The results obtained by different intelligent algorithms in solving case 1.
population to have too much influence on the other two popu-
lations, resulting in rapid convergence of three populations to
local optimum. On the other hand, the greater the number of
consecutive failures of individual continuous update, which
indicating that the individual may fall into local optimum
or that the paternal individuals in the population to which
the individual belongs cannot meet the requirement of the
individual to perform the mutation operation, and from other
populations, it is possible to find paternal individuals suitable
for the individual to perform the mutation operation. The
information exchange mechanism enhances the diversity of
95592
X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects
individuals in the single population and facilitates the indi-
vidual to escape from the local optimum.
B. DYNAMICALLY ADJUST ALGORITHM PARAMETERS
In the DE algorithm, the scaling factor and crossover rate
have an important influence on the global search ability and
convergence speed of the algorithm. The control parameters
in the traditional DE algorithm are selected from fixed values,
so the diversity of parameters is relatively poor, for some
special problems, the effect of fixed parameters is not very
good. This paper proposes a method of dynamically adjusting
VOLUME 7, 2019
X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects
TABLE 5. Friedman ranks test for the case 1.
TABLE 6. Output power of generators in the best result for the case 2.
parameters, in which the control parameters are converted
from fixed to dynamic.
1) DYNAMICALLY ADJUST THE SCALING FACTOR
If the value of the scaling factor is larger, the global search
ability of the algorithm is stronger, if the value of the scaling
factor is smaller, the convergence speed of the algorithm is
faster. In the early stages of evolution, a larger scaling factors
enhance global search ability of the algorithm, in the later
stages of evolution, a smaller scaling factor speeds up the
convergence of the algorithm. This paper uses a nonlinear
decrement method to dynamically adjust the scaling factor.
The scaling factor is given by:
Fmt = N (αt , βt )
t × (αmax − αmin )
αt = αmax − βt = 0.1
tmax
VOLUME 7, 2019
where N (αt , βt ) represents the normal distribution function
with a mean of αt and a standard deviation of βt ; αmax is the
maximum value of αt ; αmin is the minimum value of αt .
2) DYNAMICALLY ADJUST THE CROSSOVER RATE
The crossover rate has a great influence on the diversity of
the population. When the value of the crossover rate is large,
it can be seen from the formula (9) that most of the elements
of the trial vector uti come from the donor vector vti , the
probability of individual changes in the population is greatly
improved, the algorithm is easy to search for the optimal
solution. If the crossover rate is small, most of the elements
(16) of the trial vector uti come from the xit , which is beneficial for
the algorithm to perform a stable search in space. This paper
(17)
uses a nonlinear incremental method to dynamically adjust
95593
 X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects

TABLE 7. The results obtained by different intelligent algorithms in solving case 2.

95594 VOLUME 7, 2019

X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects

TABLE 8. Friedman rankstest for case2.

TABLE 9. Friedman ranks test for dataset2(13−unit). .

FIGURE 6. The convergence characteristics for case 3. FIGURE 7. The convergence characteristics for case 4.

the crossover rate. The crossover rate is calculated as:

IV. THE APPLICATION OF MPDE ALGORITHM
CRtm = N (µt , δt ) (18)
IN ED PROBLEM
t × (µmax − µmin )
µt = µmin + δt = 0.1 (19) The section III proposes the MPDE algorithm. This
tmax section introduces the application of MPDE algorithm
where N (µt , δt ) represents the normal distribution function in solving ED problems. Its main contents include
with a mean of µt and a standard deviation of δt ; µmax is the the objective function, constraints and constraints han-
maximum value of µt ; µmin is the minimum value of µt . dling of ED problem. In addition, the specific steps of

VOLUME 7, 2019 95595

 X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects

TABLE 10. Output power of generators in the best result for the case 3.
B. CONSTRAINTS
1) UNIT POWER INEQUALITY CONSTRAINTS
The output power of each generator unit should meet the
inequality constraint (22), it shall not be greater than the
maximum of power output of the generator unit and not less
than the minimum of power output of the generator unit.

Pmax
j ≥ Pj ≥ Pmin
j (22)

where Pmax
j is the maximum power of the generator
unit j.

2) RAMP-RATE CONSTRAINTS
The actual operating range of all the online units is restricted
by their corresponding ramp rate limits. The ramp-up and
ramp-down constraints can be written as follows:

Pj − P0j ≤ URj and P0j − Pj ≤ DRj (23)

j , Pj
max(Pmin , P0j
0
− DRj ) ≤ Pj ≤ min(Pmax
j + URj ) (24)

where P0j is the previous generation of unit j; DRj and URj are
down and up ramp rate limits.

3) PROHIBITED OPERATING ZONE (POZS) CONSTRAINTS

Due to the physical limitations of generators, the system
should include prohibited operating zones. POZs constraints
are given by:
 min l
Pj ≤ Pj ≤ Pj,1

Pj ∈ Puj,k−1 ≤ Pj ≤ Plj,k , k = 2, 3, . . . , gj (25)
Pj,gj ≤ Pj ≤ Pmax
 u

j

where gj is the number of the POZs for unit j; Plj,k and Puj,k
applying the MPDE algorithm to the ED problem are are the lower and upper bounds of the k-th POZs of unit j.
introduced.
4) SYSTEM POWER EQUALITY CONSTRAINTS
A. OBJECTIVE FUNCTION The total of all power of the generator unit is equal to the
The purpose of the ED is to optimize the power output of sum of load demand and the transmission loss. The equality
generator unit while satisfying the constraints of the power constraints can be formulated as follows:
system, thereby minimizing the total power generation cost.
M
The cost function when considering the valve-point effects X
can be formulated as follows: Pj = PD + PLoss (26)
  j=1
M
M X
M M
X 
min F = min Fj (Pj ) (20) PLoss =
X
Pj Bji Pi +
X
B0j Pj + B00 (27)
 
j=1
j=1 i=1 j=1

Fj (Pj ) = aj P2j + bj Pj + cj + |ej sin(fj (Pj − Pmin

j ))| (21)
where F is the total power generation cost of the power
system; Fj (Pj ) is the power consumption characteristic of
the power generation unit j; M is the total number of the
power generation units; Pj is the output power of the power
generation unit j; aj , bj , cj , ej , fj are the cost coefficients of the
generator unit j; Pmin
j is the minimum power of the generator
unit j.
95596
where PD is the total load demand; PLoss is the transmission
losses; Bji , B0j , B00 are the losses coefficients; Pi is the power
output of unit i.
C. CONSTRAINTS HANDING
1) INEQUALITY AND RAMP-RATE CONSTRAINTS HANDING
The new individual vector generated by the algorithm after
the crossover operation may not satisfy the inequality and
VOLUME 7, 2019
X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects

TABLE 11. The results obtained by different intelligent algorithms in solving case 3.

VOLUME 7, 2019 95597

 X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects

TABLE 11. (Continued). The results obtained by different intelligent algorithms in solving case 3.

[18]

95598 VOLUME 7, 2019

X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects

TABLE 11. (Continued). The results obtained by different intelligent algorithms in solving case 3.

TABLE 12. Friedman ranks test for case 3.

VOLUME 7, 2019 95599

 X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects

TABLE 13. Output power of generators in the best result for the case 4.
3) EQUALITY CONSTRAINTS HANDLING
This paper takes a new method to deal with equality con-
straints. The difference is distributed to each generation unit
by calculating the difference between the current total output
and the demand output. In this way, not only the genera-
tor unit can be corrected to satisfy the equality constraints,
but also the output power of the generator unit can be
changed less, and the influence due to the variation of the
output power can be reduced. The specific steps are analyzed
below:
Step 1: If Pj violates formula (24) or satisfies formula (25),
set the transition variable Tj = 0, else Tj = Pj .
Step 2: Calculate the difference 1 between the current total
output and the demand output.
M
X
1= Pj − PD − PLoss (30)
j=1

If |1| > 0, Perform Step 3, else Perform Step 4.

Step 3: Modify the output of Pj in order to satisfy the
equality constraints (26) with following formula:
Tj
Pj = Pj − 1 × PM (31)
j=1 Tj
Step 4: Check all the modified Pj , if there is any violation
of the inequality constrains, Perform Formula (28) and (29),
back to step 1.

D. THE STEPS OF APPLYING MPDE ALGORITHM

TO ED PROBLEM
In this part, the procedure of the MPDE algorithm for solving
ED problem is described. The specific steps analyzed below:
Step 1: Parameters preparation. The total number of power
generation units (M ).The cost coefficients of the generator
units. The maximum and minimum capacity constraints of all
generator units. The total load demand (PD ). The maximum
and minimum vales of αt , µt and Qt . The number of individ-
uals in one population (NP ). The maximum iteration number
(tmax ).
ramp-rate constraints. When this happens, the modified out- Step 2: Initialization. The power output of each individual
put power of each generator unit is calculated as: vector is derived from formula (32). Modify the individual
     vector that violates equality constraints and inequality con-
max P min , P0 −DR P ≤ max P min , P0 −DR straints. Evaluate the fitness value of the individual according
j j j
 j j  j j


   to formula (20) and (21).
Pj = min Pmax j , P0
j +UR j Pj ≥ min P max
j , P0
j +UR j
Pm,j = Pmin + rand(0, 1) × (Pmax − Pmin

j ) (32)

Pj Otherwise j j

(28) where Pm.j represents the output power of the j − th power
generator unit of the individual m.
2) PROHIBITED OPERATING ZONE CONSTRAINTS HANDING Step 3: Population division. According to the multi-
If the generator units of the new individual vector generated population strategy shown in Figure 1, the population is
by the algorithm are in prohibited operating zones, the output divided into three equal-sized populations.
power of each generator unit is adjusted as follows: Step 4: Information exchange among populations. Qt is
    adjusted by formula (12). Judge the population to which
(
Plj,k If Pj − Plj,k ≤ Puj,k − Pj the individual m belongs and according to formulas (13)-
Pj = (29) (15) the parental individuals and mutation strategy are
Puj,k Otherwise selected to perform the mutation operation, so as to realize

95600 VOLUME 7, 2019

X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects
information exchange among populations. The Fmt is obtained
by using (16) and (17).
Step 5: Obtain CRtm according to formulas (18) and (19).
Perform crossover operation and generate the trial vector.
Modify the trial vector that violates equality constraints and
inequality constraints. Evaluate the fitness value of the indi-
vidual according to formulas (20) and (21).
Step6: Perform selection operation and update qm by
using (11).
Step 7: If the maximum number of iterations is reached,
the algorithm terminates. Output the global optimal fitness
value, else go to step 4.
V. SIMULATION RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
In order to test the comprehensive performance of the
improved algorithm, we tested six cases of 13-, 40-, 80-
and 140- unit test systems with this algorithm. All cases are
coded in C++ and implemented in Visual Studio 2013, which
are tested on a PC with Intel i5 2.3GHz processor, 4GB of
RAM and Windows 10 Professional, each case runs 50 times
independently and we compare them with the results of other
intelligent algorithms.
A. SETTING ALGORITHM PARAMETERS
The MPDE algorithm is sensitive to parameters. The parame-
ters of the MPDE algorithm for solving the ED problems are
shown in Table 1 and Table 2. The brief introduction to the
test cases is also shown in Table 2, including the valve-point
effects (VPE), transmission losses (TL), prohibited operating
zones (POZs) and ramp rate limits (RRL).
B. CASE 1
Case 1 is one case in the 13- unit test system, which considers
the valve-point effects, and its load demand is 1800 MW.
there are two sets of data are used for the fuel consumption
cost coefficients. The first data set (DataSet1(13−unit) ) uses for
the fuel consumption cost coefficients and generation limits
are refer to [44]. The second data set (DataSet2(13−unit) )
uses for the fuel consumption cost coefficients and generation
limits are refer to [4]. The difference between them is the e
fuel consumption cost coefficient of 3-th unit.
Case 1 was run independently for 50 times with the MPDE
algorithm. Figure 4 shows the convergence characteristics of
the MPDE algorithm when solving case 1. Table 3 shows
the output of each generator unit at the lowest total
generation cost with the different fuel consumption cost
coefficients.
Table 4 shows the results of the MPDE algorithm and other
intelligent algorithms to test case 1, including the minimum
cost, mean cost, maximum cost, standard deviation value,
time and NFE (NFE= NP ∗ tmax ). As can be seen from
Table 6, for DataSet1(13−unit) ), HIS, CSOMA, DHS, IDE and
MPDE can get the lowest cost and DHS takes less time,
but the MPDE algorithm is far superior to the CSOMA,
VOLUME 7, 2019
DHS and HIS, IDE algorithm in terms of mean cost, max-
imum cost, standard deviation. The maximum, minimum,
mean, and standard deviation of the MPDE algorithm are
the best. Although the running time of the DEC-SQP algo-
rithm is faster than the running time of the MPED algorithm,
the MPDE algorithm is far superior to the DEC-SQP algo-
rithm in terms of accuracy. For DataSet2(13−unit) ), MABC,
FAPSO-VDE, MsEBBO and MPDE can obtain the lowest
cost. The maximum, minimum and mean values of MPDE
are equal. The stability of MPDE is stronger than MABC,
FAPSO-VDE and MsEBBO. In addition, the running time
of MPDE is shorter than that of MABC and FAPSO-VDE.
Although ST-HDE, NSEO and CBA are superior in time to
MPDE, MPDE is superior to them in other respects. By com-
paring the results of the MPDE algorithm with other intelli-
gent algorithms, the proposed algorithm has great advantages
in solving case 1.
Table 5 depicts the ranks computed through the Friedman
test [65], [66] and the Friedman test is implemented by
the software SPSS. Calculate the fuel consumption cost of
each generator unit for each algorithm (The cost is accurate
to 0.0001$/h.). Rank the algorithms for each generator unit,
and average the ranks obtained in all generator units for
each algorithm. The algorithm with the smaller mean ranking
performs better. As can be seen from Table 5, the MPDE ranks
the first. MPDE is superior to all algorithms.
C. CASE 2
Case 2 is one of the 13- unit test system, which considers
the valve-point effects and the transmission losses. Its load
demand is 2520 MW There are four sets of data are used
for the case 2. The first data set (DataSet1(13−unit) ) uses for
the loss coefficients B are given in Table A-1 of Appendix A
and the cost coefficients are refer to [4]. The second data set
(DataSet2(13−unit) ) uses for the loss coefficients B are given
in Table A-I of Appendix A with correction B0,11 = 0.0017
and the cost coefficients are refer to [4]. The third data
set (DataSet3(13−unit) ) uses for the loss coefficients B are
given in Table A-I of Appendix A with correction B1,10 =
0.0005 B00 = 0.0055 and the fuel consumption cost coeffi-
cients are refer to [4]. The fourth data set (DataSet4(13−unit) )
uses for the loss coefficients B are given in Table A-I of
Appendix A with correction B1,10 = 0.0005 B00 = 0.0055
and the cost coefficients are refer to [44].
Case 2 was run independently for 50 times with the MPDE
algorithm. Figure 5 shows the convergence characteristics of
the MPDE algorithm when solving case 2. Table 6 shows the
output of each generator unit.
Table 7 shows the results of the MPDE algorithm and
other intelligent algorithms to test case 2, including the min-
imum cost, mean cost, maximum cost, standard deviation
value, time and NFE. As can be seen from Table 7, for
DataSet1(13−unit) ), MABC, MCSA, MSOS and MPDE can
get the lowest cost and their maximum, minimum and mean
values are equal. In terms of time, MPDE is better than
95601
 X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects

TABLE 14. The results obtained by different intelligent algorithms in solving case 4.

95602 VOLUME 7, 2019

X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects
TABLE 15. Output power of generators in the best result for the case 5.
MABC and MSOS, but it is a bit worse than MCSA. Although
HDE, STHDE, ICA-PSO,
BBO, SOS, CS and DE/BBO have strong competitiveness
in time, they are worse in accuracy. For DataSet2(13−unit) ),
MSOS and MPDE can get the lowest cost and their
maximum, minimum and mean values are equal, and
MPDE takes less time than MSOS. For DataSet3(13−unit)
and DataSet4(13−unit) , the MPDE has the best perfor-
mance in terms of the maximum, minimum, mean val-
ues and time, the MPDE algorithm is significantly better
than other algorithms. Table 8 depicts the ranks computed
through the Friedman test. As can be seen from Table 8,
for DataSet1(13−unit) , DataSet3(13−unit) and DataSet4(13−unit)
the MPDE has the smallest mean ranking so it ranks
the first. Table 9 depicts the Friedman ranks test for the
DataSet2(13−unit). As can be seen from Table 9, RMPDE10 > 3. Table 12 depicts the ranks computed through the Friedman
RFPSOGSA , RMPDE > RFPSOGSA and RMPDE > RFPSOGSA ,
10 12 12 13 13
only RMPDE
11 < RFPSOGSA
11 , so the mean rank of MPDE is
bigger than that of FPSOGSA. But T10 +T11 + T12 + T13 =
VOLUME 7, 2019
FIGURE 8. The convergence characteristic for case 5.
−0.1301 < 0, the total power generation cost of the MPDE
is lower than that of FPSOGSA.
D. CASE 3
Case 3 is one case in the 40- unit test system, which considers
the valve-point effects, and its load demand is 10500 MW.
There are two sets of data are used for the fuel consumption
cost coefficients. The first data set (DataSet1(40−unit) ) uses for
the fuel consumption cost coefficients and generation limits
are refer to [4]. The second data set (DataSet2(40−unit) ) uses
for the fuel consumption cost coefficients and generation
limits are refer to [48]. The difference between them is the e
fuel consumption cost coefficient of 7-th unit.
Case 3 was run independently for 50 times with the MPDE
algorithm. Figure 6 shows the convergence characteristics of
the MPDE algorithm when solving case 3. Table 10 shows
the output of each generator unit at the lowest total generation
cost.
Table 11 shows the results of the MPDE algorithm and
other intelligent algorithms to test case 3, including the min-
imum cost, mean cost, maximum cost, standard deviation
value, time and NFE. It can be seen from Table 11, for
DataSet1(40−unit) ), only EMA, MCSA, NSEO and MPDE
can get the lowest cost, MCSA takes less time than MPDE,
but MPDE has good performance in terms of the mean
cost, the maximum cost and the standard deviation. Rela-
tively speaking, MPDE is relatively stable. HDE, DE/BBO,
FAPSO–VDE and CBA are better than MPDE in time,
but in other respects, MPDE is superior to them. For
DataSet2(40−unit) ), DHS and MPDE can get the lowest cost
and DHS is better than MPDE in terms of time, but the MPDE
has the best performance in terms of the maximum, minimum
and mean value. By comparing the results of the MPDE algo-
rithm with other intelligent algorithms, the proposed algo-
rithm outperforms other intelligent algorithms in solving case
test. As can be seen from Table 12, for DataSet1(40−unit) and
DataSet2(40−unit) the MPDE has the smallest mean ranking so
it ranks the first.
95603

TABLE 16. The results obtained by different intelligent algorithms in solving case 5.
E. CASE 4
Case 4 is one case in the 40- unit test system, which considers
the valve-point effects and the transmission losses. Its load
demand is 10500 MW. there are two sets of data are used
for the fuel consumption cost coefficients in the 40- unit test
system. The first data set (DataSet1(40−unit) ) uses for the cost
coefficients and generation limits are refer to [5]. The second
data set (DataSet2(40−unit) ) uses for the fuel consumption
cost coefficients and generation limits are refer to [48]. The
B-loss coefficients are refer to [72].
95604
X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects
Case 4 was run independently for 50 times with the MPDE
algorithm. Figure 7 shows the convergence characteristics of
the MPDE algorithm when solving case 4. Table 13 shows
the output of each generator unit at the lowest total generation
cost.
Table 14 shows the results of the MPDE algorithm and
other intelligent algorithms to test case 4, including the
minimum cost, mean cost, maximum cost, standard devia-
tion value, time, and NFE. As can be seen from Table 14,
for DataSet1(40−unit) ), the minimum cost, mean cost and
VOLUME 7, 2019
X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects

TABLE 17. Output power of generators in the best result for the case 6.

FIGURE 9. The convergence characteristic for case 6.

the maximum cost of MPDE are superior to the results of

other intelligent algorithms. The stability and accuracy of
MPDE are stronger than all intelligent algorithms in the table.
Some intelligent algorithms take less time than MPDE, but
MPDE is more accurate than them in terms of minimum cost,
mean cost and maximum cost. For DataSet2(40−unit) ), MPDE
is superior to AGWO in all respects. the statistical results
obtained by MPDE are highly competitive compared to these
by the other intelligent algorithms.

F. CASE 5
Case 5 is one case in the 80- unit test system, which considers
the valve-point effects and the prohibited operating zones.
Its load demand is 21000 MW. This large-scale system is
created by expanding the 40 generating unit system. The fuel
consumption cost coefficients and generation limits are refer
to [4] and The prohibited operating zones are refer to [90].
Case 5 was run independently for 50 times with the MPDE
algorithm. The lowest generating cost is 242794.729463$/h.
Figure 8 shows the convergence characteristic of the MPDE
algorithm when solving case 5. Table 15 shows the output of
each generator unit at the lowest total generation cost.
Table 16 shows the results of the MPDE algorithm and
other intelligent algorithms to test cases 5, including the
minimum cost, mean cost, maximum cost, standard deviation
value, time, and NFE. As can be seen from Table 16, the min-
imum cost, mean cost and the maximum cost of MPDE are is 49342 WM. All the data of valve point cost coefficients and
superior to the results calculated by other intelligent algo- generation limits for each unit are refer to [92].
rithms. The stability and accuracy of MPDE are stronger Case 6 was run independently for 50 times with the MPDE
than all intelligent algorithms in the table. Some intelligent algorithm. The lowest generating cost is 1559708.807042$/h.
algorithms take less time than MPDE, but MPDE is more Figure 9 shows the convergence characteristic of the MPDE
accurate than them in terms of minimum cost, mean cost and algorithm when solving the case 6. 1559708.807042$/h is the
maximum cost. the statistical results obtained by MPDE are minimum value that can be found so far. It can be seen that
highly competitive compared to these by the other intelligent the MPDE algorithm has a good performance in solving the
algorithms. case 6. Table 17 shows the output of each generator unit at
the lowest total generation cost.
G. CASE 6 Table 18 shows the results of the MPDE algorithm and
Case 6 is one of the 140- unit test system, which considers the other intelligent algorithms to test cases 6, including the
valve-point effects and the ramp rate limits. Its load demand minimum cost, mean cost, maximum cost, standard devia-

VOLUME 7, 2019 95605

 X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects

TABLE 18. The results obtained by different intelligent algorithms in solving case 6.

TABLE A-1. B-Loss coefficients for the case2.

tion value, time and NFE. As can be seen from Table 18, OWGO, CCPSO, KGMO, and GWO have an advantage in
MPDE can get the lowest cost. The maximum, minimum, terms of time and OGWO is better than MPDE in the standard
and mean of the MPDE algorithm are the best. Although deviation, they are not as good as MPDE in terms of accuracy,

95606 VOLUME 7, 2019

X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects
MPDE has a strong competition in accuracy. the proposed
algorithm has great advantages in solving case 6.
VI. CONCLUSION
A differential evolution algorithm based on multi-population
(MPDE) is proposed to solve the ED problem with
valve-point effects. The MPDE algorithm applies a
multi-population strategy to the traditional differential evolu-
tion algorithm. In order to enhance its search ability, the muta-
tion strategy and algorithm parameter in each population are
also different. During the evolution process, individuals in
different populations can also learn from individuals in other
populations, this method of information exchange enhances
the diversity of a single population. Moreover, the MPDE
algorithm adopts the normal distribution function to dynami-
cally adjust the scaling factor and crossover rate. The MPDE
algorithm is tested on the 13-, 40-, 80- and 140- unit test
systems. Statistical results are compared with the reported
results in literature, the MPDE algorithm has better accuracy
and robustness than other intelligent algorithms, and can
provide satisfactory global optimization solutions. Therefore,
the MPDE algorithm is a very suitable tool for solving the ED
problem with the valve point effects.
APPENDIX A
See Table A-1.
REFERENCES
[1] D. C. Walters and G. B. Sheble, ‘‘Genetic algorithm solution of economic
dispatch with valve point loading,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 8, no. 3,
pp. 1325–1332, Aug. 1993.
[2] R. A. Jabr, A. H. Coonick, and B. J. Cory, ‘‘A homogeneous linear program-
ming algorithm for the security constrained economic dispatch problem,’’
IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 930–936, Aug. 2000.
[3] J.-Y. Fan and L. Zhang, ‘‘Real-time economic dispatch with line flow and
emission constraints using quadratic programming,’’ IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 320–325, May 1998.
[4] N. Sinha, R. Chakrabarti, and P. K. Chattopadhyay, ‘‘Evolutionary pro-
gramming techniques for economic load dispatch,’’ IEEE Trans. Evol.
Comput., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 83–94, Feb. 2003.
[5] N. Noman and H. Iba, ‘‘Differential evolution for economic load dis-
patch problems,’’ Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 78, no. 8, pp. 1322–1331,
Aug. 2008.
[6] Z.-L. Gaing, ‘‘Particle swarm optimization to solving the economic dis-
patch considering the generator constraints,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst.,
vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 1187–1195, Aug. 2003.
[7] Y. H. Song, C. S. Chou, and T. J. Stonham, ‘‘Combined heat and power
economic dispatch by improved ant colony search algorithm,’’ Electr.
Power Syst. Res., vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 115–121, Nov. 1999.
[8] P.-H. Chen and H.-C. Chang, ‘‘Large-scale economic dispatch by genetic
algorithm,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 1919–1926,
Nov. 1995.
[9] K. P. Wong and C. C. Fung, ‘‘Simulated annealing based economic dispatch
algorithm,’’ IEE Proc. C Gener., Transmiss. Distrib., vol. 140, no. 6,
pp. 509–515, Nov. 1993.
[10] R. Naresh, J. Dubey, and J. Sharma, ‘‘Two-phase neural network based
modelling framework of constrained economic load dispatch,’’ IEE Proc.
Gener., Transmiss. Distrib., vol. 151, no. 3, pp. 373–378, May 2004.
[11] W.-M. Lin, F.-S. Cheng, and M.-T. Tsay, ‘‘An improved tabu search for
economic dispatch with multiple minima,’’ IEEE Power Eng. Rev., vol. 17,
no. 1, pp. 108–112, Feb. 2002.
[12] B. K. Panigrahi and V. R. Pandi, ‘‘Bacterial foraging optimisation:
Nelder-Mead hybrid algorithm for economic load dispatch,’’ IET Gener.,
Transmiss. Distrib., vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 556–565, Jul. 2008.
VOLUME 7, 2019
[13] G. P. Singh and A. Singh, ‘‘Comparative study of krill herd, firefly and
cuckoo search algorithms for unimodal and multimodal optimization,’’ Int.
J. Intell. Syst. Appl., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 35–49, Feb. 2014.
[14] R. Kumar, A. Sadu, R. Kumar, and S. K. Panda, ‘‘A novel multi-objective
directed bee colony optimization algorithm for multi-objective emission
constrained economic power dispatch,’’ Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst.,
vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 1241–1250, Dec. 2015.
[15] P. K. Roy, S. P. Ghoshal, and S. S. Thakur, ‘‘Biogeography-based optimiza-
tion for economic load dispatch problems,’’ Electr. Power Compon. Syst.,
vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 166–181, Dec. 2009.
[16] J. Zhao, S. Liu, M. Zhou, X. Guo, and L. Qi, ‘‘Modified cuckoo search
algorithm to solve economic power dispatch optimization problems,’’
IEEE/CAA J. Autom. Sinica, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 794–806, Jul. 2018.
[17] C. Jiejin, M. Xiaoqian, L. Lixiang, and P. Haipeng, ‘‘Chaotic particle
swarm optimization for economic dispatch considering the generator con-
straints,’’ Energy Convers. Manage., vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 645–653, Feb. 2007.
[18] B. R. Adarsh, T. Raghunathan, T. Jayabarathi, and X.-S. Yang, ‘‘Economic
dispatch using chaotic bat algorithm,’’ Energy, vol. 96, pp. 666–675,
Feb. 2016.
[19] J.-B. Park, K.-S. Lee, J.-R. Shin, and K. Y. Lee, ‘‘A particle swarm
optimization for economic dispatch with nonsmooth cost functions,’’ IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 34–42, Feb. 2005.
[20] V. K. Jadoun, N. Gupta, K. R. Niazi, and A. Swarnkar, ‘‘Modulated particle
swarm optimization for economic emission dispatch,’’ Int. J. Elect. Power
Energy Syst., vol. 73, pp. 80–88, Dec. 2015.
[21] K. T. Chaturvedi, M. Pandit, and L. Srivastava, ‘‘Particle swarm opti-
mization with time varying acceleration coefficients for non-convex eco-
nomic power dispatch,’’ Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 31, no. 6,
pp. 249–257, Jul. 2009.
[22] D. He, F. Wang, and Z. Mao, ‘‘A hybrid genetic algorithm approach based
on differential evolution for economic dispatch with valve-point effect,’’
Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 31–38, Jan. 2008.
[23] G. Xiong, D. Shi, and X. Duan, ‘‘Multi-strategy ensemble biogeography-
based optimization for economic dispatch problems,’’ Appl. Energy,
vol. 111, pp. 801–811, Nov. 2013.
[24] R. Storn and K. Price, ‘‘Differential evolution-a simple and efficient heuris-
tic for global optimization over continuous spaces,’’ J. Global Optim.,
vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 341–359, Dec. 1997.
[25] A. Draa, S. Bouzoubia, and I. Boukhalfa, ‘‘A sinusoidal differential evo-
lution algorithm for numerical optimisation,’’ Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 27,
pp. 99–126, Feb. 2015.
[26] A. W. Mohamed, ‘‘An improved differential evolution algorithm with
triangular mutation for global numerical optimization,’’ Comput. Ind. Eng.,
vol. 85, pp. 359–375, Jul. 2015.
[27] G. Li, Q. Lin, L. Cui, Z. Du, Z. Liang, J. Chen, N. Lu, and Z. Ming,
‘‘A novel hybrid differential evolution algorithm with modified CoDE and
JADE,’’ Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 47, pp. 577–599, Oct. 2016.
[28] A. W. Mohamed and A. K. Mohamed, ‘‘Adaptive guided differential
evolution algorithm with novel mutation for numerical optimization,’’ Int.
J. Mach. Learn. Cybern., vol. 10, pp. 253–277, Feb. 2019.
[29] L. Cui, G. Li, Z. Zhu, Q. Lin, K.-C. Wong, J. Chen, N. Lu, and J. Lu, ‘‘Adap-
tive multiple-elites-guided composite differential evolution algorithm with
a shift mechanism,’’ Inf. Sci., vol. 422, pp. 122–143, Jan. 2018.
[30] G. Wu, X. Shen, H. Li, H. Chen, A. Lin, and P. N. Suganthan, ‘‘Ensemble of
differential evolution variants,’’ Inf. Sci., vol. 423, pp. 172–186, Jan. 2018.
[31] A. W. Mohamed, A. A. Hadi, A. M. Fattouh, and K. M. Jambi, ‘‘LSHADE
with semi-parameter adaptation hybrid with CMA-ES for solving CEC
2017 benchmark problems,’’ in Proc. IEEE Congr. Evol. Comput. (CEC),
Jun. 2017, pp. 145–152.
[32] N. Amjady and H. Sharifzadeh, ‘‘Solution of non-convex economic dis-
patch problem considering valve loading effect by a new modified differ-
ential evolution algorithm,’’ Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst., vol. 32, no. 8,
pp. 893–903, Oct. 2010.
[33] A. Bhattacharya and P. K. Chattopadhyay, ‘‘Hybrid differential evolution
with biogeography-based optimization for solution of economic load dis-
patch,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 1955–1964, Nov. 2010.
[34] P. K. Roy, S. Bhui, and C. Paul, ‘‘Solution of economic load dispatch using
hybrid chemical reaction optimization approach,’’ Appl. Soft Comput. J.,
vol. 24, pp. 109–125, Nov. 2014.
[35] T. Niknam, H. D. Mojarrad, and H. Z. Meymand, ‘‘A novel hybrid par-
ticle swarm optimization for economic dispatch with valve-point load-
ing effects,’’ Energy Convers. Manage., vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 1800–1809,
Apr. 2011.
95607

[36] D. Zou, S. Li, G.-G. Wang, Z. Li, and H. Ouyang, ‘‘An improved dif-
ferential evolution algorithm for the economic load dispatch problems
with or without valve-point effects,’’ Appl. Energy, vol. 181, pp. 375–390,
Nov. 2016.
[37] A. S. Reddy and K. Vaisakh, ‘‘Shuffled differential evolution for large
scale economic dispatch,’’ Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 96, pp. 237–245,
Mar. 2013.
[38] G. Wu, R. Mallipeddi, P. N. Suganthan, R. Wang, and H. Chen, ‘‘Differ-
ential evolution with multi-population based ensemble of mutation strate-
gies,’’ Inf. Sci., vol. 329, pp. 329–345, Feb. 2016.
[39] S. Das, A. Konar, and U. K. Chakraborty, ‘‘Two improved differential
evolution schemes for faster global search,’’ in Proc. 7th Annu. Conf.
Genetic Evol. Comput. (GECCO), Washington, DC, USA, Jun. 2005,
pp. 991–998.
[40] A. K. Qin, V. L. Huang, and P. N. Suganthan, ‘‘Differential evolution
algorithm with strategy adaptation for global numerical optimization,’’
IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 398–417, Apr. 2009.
[41] J. Zhang and A. C. Sanderson, ‘‘JADE: Adaptive differential evolution
with optional external archive,’’ IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput., vol. 13, no. 5,
pp. 945–958, Oct. 2009.
[42] M. M. Ali and A. Törn, ‘‘Population set-based global optimization algo-
rithms: Some modifications and numerical studies,’’ Comput. Oper. Res.,
vol. 31, no. 10, pp. 1703–1725, Sep. 2004.
[43] N. Ghorbani and E. Babaei, ‘‘Exchange market algorithm for economic
load dispatch,’’ Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst., vol. 75, pp. 19–27,
Feb. 2016.
[44] L. dos Santos Coelho and V. C. Mariani, ‘‘Particle swarm approach based
on quantum mechanics and harmonic oscillator potential well for economic
load dispatch with valve-point effects,’’ Energy Convers. Manage., vol. 49,
no. 11, pp. 3080–3085, Nov. 2008.
[45] L. dos Santos Coelho, R. C. T. Souza, and V. C. Mariani, ‘‘Improved
differential evolution approach based on cultural algorithm and diversity
measure applied to solve economic load dispatch problems,’’ Math. Com-
put. Simul., vol. 79, no. 10, pp. 3136–3147, Jun. 2009.
[46] L. dos Santos Coelho and V. C. Mariani, ‘‘An efficient cultural
self-organizing migrating strategy for economic dispatch optimization
with valve-point effect,’’ Energy Convers. Manage., vol. 51, no. 12,
pp. 2580–2587, Dec. 2010.
[47] L. dos Santos Coelho and V. C. Mariani, ‘‘An improved harmony search
algorithm for power economic load dispatch,’’ Energy Convers. Manage.,
vol. 50, no. 10, pp. 2522–2526, Oct. 2009.
[48] L. dos Santos Coelho and V. C. Mariani, ‘‘Combining of chaotic differential
evolution and quadratic programming for economic dispatch optimiza-
tion with valve-point effect,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 21, no. 2,
pp. 989–996, May 2006.
[49] Y. Labbi, D. Ben Attous, and B. Mahdad, ‘‘Artificial bee colony optimiza-
tion for economic dispatch with valve point effect,’’ Front Energy, vol. 38,
no. 7, pp. 786–803, May 2010.
[50] B. Mohammadi-Ivatloo, A. Rabiee, A. Soroudi, and M. Ehsan, ‘‘Iteration
PSO with time varying acceleration coefficients for solving non-convex
economic dispatch problems,’’ Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst , vol. 42,
no. 1, pp. 508–516, Nov. 2012.
[51] J. G. Vlachogiannis and K. Y. Lee, ‘‘Economic load dispatch—A com-
parative study on heuristic optimization techniques with an improved
coordinated aggregation-based PSO,’’ IEEE Trans. Power Syst., vol. 25,
no. 1, pp. 591–592, Feb. 2010.
[52] M. A. Al-Betar, M. A. Awadallah, A. T. Khader, and A. L. Bolaji,
‘‘Tournament-based harmony search algorithm for non-convex economic
load dispatch problem,’’ Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 47, pp. 449–459,
Oct. 2016.
[53] L. Wang and L.-P. Li, ‘‘An effective differential harmony search algorithm
for the solving non-convex economic load dispatch problems,’’ Int. J. Elect.
Power Energy Syst., vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 832–843, Jan. 2013.
[54] V. Hosseinnezhad, M. Rafiee, M. Ahmadian, and M. T. Ameli, ‘‘Species-
based quantum particle swarm optimization for economic load dispatch,’’
Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst., vol. 63, pp. 311–322, Dec. 2014.
[55] T. A. A. Victoire and A. E. Jeyakumar, ‘‘Hybrid PSO–SQP for economic
dispatch with valve-point effect,’’ Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 71, no. 1,
pp. 51–59, Sep. 2004.
[56] W.-M. Lin, H.-J. Gow, and M.-T. Tsai, ‘‘Combining of direct search and
signal-to-noise ratio for economic dispatch optimization,’’ Energy Con-
vers. Manage., vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 487–493, Jan. 2011.
95608
X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects
[57] C.-L. Chiang, ‘‘Improved genetic algorithm for power economic dispatch
of units with valve-point effects and multiple fuels,’’ IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 1690–1699, Nov. 2005.
[58] X. He, Y. Rao, and J. Huang, ‘‘A novel algorithm for economic
load dispatch of power systems,’’ Neurocomputing, vol. 171, no. 1,
pp. 1454–1461, Jan. 2016.
[59] J. Cai, Q. Li, L. Li, H. Peng, and Y. Yang, ‘‘A hybrid FCASO-SQP method
for solving the economic dispatch problems with valve-point effects,’’
Energy, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 346–353, Feb. 2012.
[60] M. S. P. Subathra, S. E. Selvan, T. A. A. Victoire, A. H. Christinal, and
U. Amato, ‘‘A hybrid with cross-entropy method and sequential quadratic
programming to solve economic load dispatch problem,’’ IEEE Syst. J.,
vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 1031–1044, Sep. 2015.
[61] T. Niknam, ‘‘A new fuzzy adaptive hybrid particle swarm optimization
algorithm for non-linear, non-smooth and non-convex economic dispatch
problem,’’ Appl. Energy, vol. 87, no. 1, pp. 327–339, Jan. 2010.
[62] M. N. Alam and T. R. Chelliah, ‘‘A new sensitivity evaluation based
optimization algorithm for economic load dispatch problems,’’ in Proc. Int.
Conf. Energy Efficient Technol. Sustainability, Apr. 2013, pp. 995–1000.
[63] H. Da-kuo, W. Fu-li, and M. Zhi-Zhong, ‘‘Hybrid genetic algorithm for
economic dispatch with valve-point effect,’’ Electr. Power Syst. Res.,
vol. 78, no. 4, pp. 626–633, Apr. 2008.
[64] D. C. Secui, ‘‘A new modified artificial bee colony algorithm for the
economic dispatch problem,’’ Energy Convers. Manage., vol. 89, no. 1,
pp. 43–62, Jan. 2015.
[65] J. Derrac, S. García, D. Molina, and F. Herrera, ‘‘A practical tutorial on
the use of nonparametric statistical tests as a methodology for comparing
evolutionary and swarm intelligence algorithms,’’ Swarm Evol. Comput.,
vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 3–18, Mar. 2011.
[66] A. W. Mohamed, A. A. Hadi, and K. M. Jambi, ‘‘Novel mutation
strategy for enhancing SHADE and LSHADE algorithms for global
numerical optimization,’’ Swarm Evol. Comput., to be published. doi:
10.1016/j.swevo.2018.10.006.
[67] S. K. Wang, J. P. Chiou, and C. W. Liu, ‘‘Non-smooth/non-convex
economic dispatch by a novel hybrid differential evolution algorithm,’’
IET Gener., Transmiss. Distrib., vol. 1, no. 5, pp. 793–803, Sep. 2007.
[68] K. Bhattacharjee, A. Bhattacharya, and S. H. N. Dey, ‘‘Oppositional
Real Coded Chemical Reaction Optimization for different economic dis-
patch problems,’’ Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst., vol. 55, pp. 378–391,
Feb. 2014.
[69] D. C. Secui, ‘‘A modified Symbiotic Organisms Search algorithm for
large scale economic dispatch problem with valve-point effects,’’ Energy,
vol. 113, no. 15, pp. 366–384, Oct. 2016.
[70] X.-S. Yang, Nature-Inspired Optimization Algorithms. Amsterdam,
The Netherlands: Elsevier, 2014.
[71] S. Duman, N. Yorukeren, and I. H. Altas, ‘‘A novel modified hybrid
PSOGSA based on fuzzy logic for non-convex economic dispatch prob-
lem with valve-point effect,’’ Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst., vol. 64,
pp. 121–135, Jan. 2015.
[72] A. K. Barisal and R. C. Prusty, ‘‘Large scale economic dispatch of power
systems using oppositional invasive weed optimization,’’ Appl. Soft Com-
put., vol. 29, pp. 122–137, Apr. 2015.
[73] M. Pradhan, P. K. Roy, and T. Pal, ‘‘Oppositional based grey wolf opti-
mization algorithm for economic dispatch problem of power system,’’ Ain
Shams Eng. J., vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 2015–2025, Dec. 2018.
[74] A. I. Selvakumar and K. Thanushkodi, ‘‘A new particle swarm optimization
solution to nonconvex economic dispatch problems,’’ IEEE Trans. Power
Syst., vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 42–51, Feb. 2007.
[75] M. Kumar and J. S. Dhillon, ‘‘Hybrid artificial algae algorithm for eco-
nomic load dispatch,’’ Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 71, pp. 89–109, Oct. 2018.
[76] N. Amjady and H. Nasiri-Rad, ‘‘Economic dispatch using an efficient real-
coded genetic algorithm,’’ IET Gener., Transmiss. Distrib., vol. 3, no. 3,
pp. 266–278, Mar. 2009.
[77] N. Amjady and H. Nasiri-Rad, ‘‘Solution of nonconvex and nonsmooth
economic dispatch by a new Adaptive Real Coded Genetic Algorithm,’’
Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 37, no. 7, pp. 5239–5245, Jul. 2010.
[78] M. Ghasemi, M. Taghizadeh, S. Ghavidel, and A. Abbasian, ‘‘Colonial
competitive differential evolution: An experimental study for optimal eco-
nomic load dispatch,’’ Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 40, pp. 342–363, Mar. 2016.
[79] M. Moradi-Dalvand, B. Mohammadi-Ivatloo, A. Najafi, and A. Rabiee,
‘‘Continuous quick group search optimizer for solving non-convex eco-
nomic dispatch problems,’’ Electr. Power Syst. Res., vol. 93, pp. 93–105,
Dec. 2012.
VOLUME 7, 2019
X. Li et al.: MPDE for ED Problems With Valve-Point Effects

[80] M. Gholamghasemi, E. Akbari, M. B. Asadpoor, and M. Ghasemi, ‘‘A new XUEPING LI received the M.Eng. degree in elec-
solution to the non-convex economic load dispatch problems using phasor trical engineering and the Ph.D. degree in power
particle swarm optimization,’’ Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 79, pp. 111–124, electronics and power transmission from Yan-
Jun. 2019. shan University, Qinhuangdao, China, in 2009
[81] J.-B. Park, Y.-W. Jeong, J.-R. Shin, and K. Y. Lee, ‘‘An improved particle and 2013, respectively. He is currently with the
swarm optimization for nonconvex economic dispatch problems,’’ IEEE School of Electrical Engineering, Yanshan Uni-
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 156–166, Feb. 2010. versity. His research interests include economic
[82] D. Aydin and S. Özyön, ‘‘Solution to non-convex economic dispatch
operation and control of power system, power grid
problem with valve point effects by incremental artificial bee colony with
state estimation, and inspired optimization algo-
local search,’’ Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 2456–2466, May 2013.
[83] R. P. Parouha and K. N. Das, ‘‘DPD: An intelligent parallel hybrid rithms and their application on various optimiza-
algorithm for economic load dispatch problems with various practical tion problems.
constraints,’’ Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 63, pp. 295–309, Nov. 2016.
[84] H. Shayeghi and A. Ghasemi, ‘‘A modified artificial bee colony based on
chaos theory for solving non-convex emission/economic dispatch,’’ Energy
Convers. Manage., vol. 79, pp. 344–354, Mar. 2014.
[85] A. Ghasemi, ‘‘A fuzzified multi objective interactive honey bee mating
optimization for environmental/economic power dispatch with valve point HONGJIE ZHANG received the B.Eng. degree in
effect,’’ Int. J. Elect. Power Energy. Syst., vol. 49, pp. 308–321, Jul. 2013. electric power systems and automation from the
[86] D. Singh and J. S. Dhillon, ‘‘Ameliorated grey wolf optimization for eco-
Hebei Normal University of Science and Technol-
nomic load dispatch problem,’’ Energy, vol. 169, pp. 398–419, Feb. 2019.
ogy, Qinhuangdao, China, in 2017. He is currently
[87] M. Singh and J. S. Dhillon, ‘‘Multiobjective thermal power dispatch using
opposition-based greedy heuristic search,’’ Int. J. Elect. Power Energy pursuing the M.Eng. degree with the Department
Syst., vol. 82, pp. 339–353, Nov. 2016. of Electric Power Systems and Automation, Yan-
[88] I. Ciornei and E. Kyriakides, ‘‘A GA-API solution for the economic shan University. His research interests include
dispatch of generation in power system operation,’’ IEEE Trans. Power optimization algorithm and economic operation,
Syst., vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 233–242, Feb. 2012. and control of power systems.
[89] P. K. Roy and S. Bhui, ‘‘Multi-objective quasi-oppositional teaching learn-
ing based optimization for economic emission load dispatch problem,’’ Int.
J. Electr. Power Energy Syst., vol. 53, pp. 937–948, Dec. 2013.
[90] B. Mandal, P. K. Roy, and S. Mandal, ‘‘Economic load dispatch using
krill herd algorithm,’’ Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst., vol. 57, pp. 1–10,
May 2014.
[91] T. Jayabarathi, T. Raghunathan, B. Adarsh, and P. N. Suganthan, ‘‘Eco-
nomic dispatch using hybrid grey wolf optimizer,’’ Energy, vol. 111,
pp. 630–641, Sep. 2016. ZHIGANG LU received the B.Sc. degree in
[92] S. M. A. Bulbul, M. Pradhan, P. K. Roy, and T. Pal, ‘‘Opposition-based krill automatic control and the M.S. degree in sys-
herd algorithm applied to economic load dispatch problem,’’ Ain Shams tems engineering from Xi’an Jiaotong University,
Eng. J., vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 423–440, Sep. 2018. Xi’an, China, in 1985 and 1988, respectively, and
[93] M. Pradhan, P. K. Roy, and T. Pal, ‘‘Grey wolf optimization applied to the Ph.D. degree in electric power systems and
economic load dispatch problems,’’ Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst., automation from North China Electric Power Uni-
vol. 83, pp. 325–334, Dec. 2016. versity, Beijing, China, in 1998. He is currently the
[94] A. I. Selvakumar and K. Thanushkodi, ‘‘Optimization using civilized Dean of the School of Electrical Engineering, Yan-
swarm: Solution to economic dispatch with multiple minima,’’ Electr.
shan University, Qinhuangdao, China. His current
Power Syst. Res., vol. 79, no. 1, pp. 8–16, Jan. 2009.
research is engaged in electric power systems and
[95] T. Niknam, H. D. Mojarrad, and H. Z. Meymand, ‘‘Non-smooth economic
dispatch computation by fuzzy and self adaptive particle swarm optimiza- automation. His current research is mainly engaged in multi-fault repair in
tion,’’ Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 2805–2817, Mar. 2011. power systems, economic operation and control of power systems, power
[96] M. Basu, ‘‘Kinetic gas molecule optimization for nonconvex economic grid state estimation, power system planning, and inspired optimization
dispatch problem,’’ Int. J. Elect. Power Energy Syst., vol. 80, pp. 325–332, algorithms and their application on various optimization problems.
Sep. 2016.

VOLUME 7, 2019 95609