Optimal Reconfiguration of a Power Distribution Network for Power loss

minimization and Optimal Voltage Deviation Profil based on Hybrid

Symbiotic Organism Search Algorithm

Ndjependa Patrik Roger, Boum Alexandre Teplaira *, Ndjakomo Essiane Salomé

University of Douala, Cameroon
*
Corresponding author: Boum Alexandre Teplaira, e-mail: boumat2002@yahoo.fr

Abstract - This paper presents a new optimization approach based on the Hybrid Symbiotic
organism Search Algorithm (HSOS) for the reconfiguration of a power distribution network for
minimizing active power losses and maximizing voltage at each node. The HSOS method is a
new metaheuristic algorithm that improves the SOS ( Symbiotic organism Search) algorithm.
This new technique is a combination of the SOS and the PSO ( Particle Swarm Optimization )
algorithm. It is applied on an IEEE 33 nodes test network. The results obtained show that HSOS
is better than SOS and other metaheuristic algorithms of the literature.
Keywords : power distribution network, reconfiguration, metaheuristic algorithm , HSOS , SOS
, PSO.

1. Introduction

The electrical system is the set of electrical equipment that ensures the delivery to all
consumers of electrical energy. It can be divided into four (4) main functions : production,
transportation, distribution and consumption. This paper focuses solely on the distribution of
electrical energy .
The routing of electricity induces power losses in line and voltage drops on the
distribution networks. We must therefore present palliative solutions.
Reducing losses helps reduce the cost of energy and greenhouse gases. One of the
techniques used is reconfiguration. It allows minimization of power losses in line and an
improvement of the voltage profile using optimization algorithms .
Several algorithms have been developed for the reconfiguration of electricity distribution
networks.
Min-Yuan Cheng and Doddy Prayogo [1] proposed a metaheuristic algorithm named SOS
to optimize systems . This method uses three (3) phases : mutualism, commensalism and

1
parasitism. AT Boum et al. [2] proposed a reconfiguration of the IEEE 33 node test network
using the SOS algorithm. It shows that the execution time is low and the losses are minimized
compared to other algorithms such as the genetic algorithm. Chun Wang and Hao Zhong Cheng
[3] proposed an optimization of a 33 node IEEE distribution network by reconfiguration by
applying the PGSA (Plant Growth Simulation Algorithm ) . Thuan Nguyen and Anh Viet
Thruang [4] proposed a CSA algorithm (Cukoo Search algorithm ) . The authors presented a
rconfigurationion of a 33-node IEEE network that minimized on-line active power losses and
improved the voltage profile. Sri Nivasa Rao Rayapudi et al. [5] proposed an HSA method (
Harmony Search Algorithm ) and applied on a network 33 nodes. The results show an optimum
Interrante reconfiguration.
MAKashem et al . [ 5] proposes an algorithm that determines the power losses for the
different combinations of the possible switches and selects the one with the least losses. He
compares these results with those of other methods.
Taher Niknam [7] proposed a reconfiguration based on an evolutionary algorithm that is
the combination of Honey Bee Mating Optimization and the Discrete pa rticle Swarm
Optimization (DPSO) named DPSO-MBMO. This algorithm is implemented and compared to
other methods.
LI Zhen et al. [8] proposed a Hybrid Particle Swarm Optimization that the combination
the binary PSO and PSO Discrete. This technique is used for the problem of optimal
reconfiguration. The authors first apply the PSO binary which selects a group of branches that
should be open . Second, they implement the second DPSO algorithm that selects the branch that
should be open in the branch group. This method converges quickly and has good stability.
Zhenkun Li et al. [9] proposed a PSO hybrid combining PSO binary and Discrete PSO . The
results obtained show that this algorithm is robust and converges quickly.
In this paper the HSOS algorithm is proposed for the optimal reconfiguration of a power
distribution network for the reduction of active power losses on the lines and the improvement of
the voltage profile.Thisalgorithm maximizes the effective value of the voltage at the level of
each node. The implementation is done on an IEEE 33 nodes network . The results are compared
with other algorithms in the literature such as SOS, ITS in [4] and HSA in [5].

2
 2. Problem statement

Given a simple network assumed linear as illustrated in Figure 1.

0 i-1 i i+1 n

P0,Q0 Pi-1,Qi-1 Pi,Qi Pi+1,Qi+1 Pn,Qn

PLi-1,QLi-1 PLi,QLi Pli+1,Qli+1 PLin,QLn

n corresponds to the number of branches ( Nbr )

Figure 1: Simple Network

The goal is to find an optimal network configuration that minimizes online active power
losses and voltage deviation.

Explanation of the choice of objective functions

- Active power losses (Ploss)

The distribution of electrical energy induces active power losses in the network. These
losses are not negligible which causes a shortfall for the energy supplier and the dissatisfaction of
the customers. It is therefore necessary to minimize these losses of active power online.

- Voltage deviation(Vde)

The distribution of electrical energy also induces voltage drops online. If they are
important, it would cause brownouts in the line. It is therefore necessary to minimize the voltage
deviation at the nodes of the Power network.
The objective function can be described as follows :

(1)
3
 min f 1 = min ( Ploss )
min f 2 = min (Vde) (2)

We then obtain the following function :

min (α Ploss + β Vde) (3)

Ploss : total active power losses online

Vde : voltage deviation
α and β are weighting coefficients
For our study, we will take α = β = 1
For the calculation of the power flow the following relations are used :

Pi2 +Qi2 (4)

Pi+1 = Pi − ri – PLi+1
Vi2

Pi2 + Qi2 (5)

Qi+1 = Qi − xi – QLi+1
Vi2

Pi2 +Qi2
V 2 i+1 = V 2 i − 2(riPi + xiQi) + ( ri2 + xi2 ) (6)
Vi2
With :

Pi : active power at node i

Qi : reactive power at node i
Pi + 1 : Active power at node i +1
Qi + 1 : reactive power at node i +1
ri : resistance of the branch i
xi : reactance of branch i
Vi : rms value of the voltage at node i
Vi +1 : rms value of the voltage at node i +1

4
Total losses are expressed by the relationship :

Pi2 +Qi2 (7)

P,loss=∑n−1
i=0 ri
Vi2

n = Nbr

The voltage deviation is given by the relation :

Vde = Vo - Vi ; i = 0, 1, 2, ..., Nbus - 1 (8)

Explanation of the choice of constraints

When distributing electrical energy, it is necessary to avoid voltage drops at the nodes and
overloads of the lines.
Thus, one needs the constraints for the objective function . They are :

Vi, min ≤ Vi ≤ Vi, max ; i = 0, 1, 2 , ..., Nbus -1 (9)

0 ≤ Ii ≤ Ii, max ; i = 0, 1, 2 , ..., N br -1 (10)

With
Vi,min : minimum value of the acceptable voltage at a node
Vi,max : maximum value of the acceptable voltage at a node
Ii : Intensity of line current flowing through a branch
Ii,max: Intensity of the maximum line current defined by the manufacturer

The problem is finally formulated as follows :

5
 𝑃𝑃𝑃𝑃 2 +𝑄𝑄𝑄𝑄 2
𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚(𝛼𝛼 ∑𝑛𝑛−1
𝑖𝑖=0 𝑉𝑉𝑉𝑉 2
𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 + 𝛽𝛽(𝑉𝑉𝑜𝑜 − 𝑉𝑉𝑖𝑖 )) (13)

Equations (9) and (10) are the constraints.

In addition, the configuration of the network (power transit) after implementation of the
algorithm must be radial and all the loads must be fed with electrical energy (at least the majority
).
In this study, the vector of decision variables giving the state of the switches is :
X = [x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 … xNbr ]
After a binary coding, we obtain the state vector of the switches by following branch :

S = [S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 … SNbr ]

3. Hybrid Symbiotic Organism Search (HSOS)

The HSOS algorithm is a new approach to metaheuristics . It combines the SOS algorithm
and the PSO.
3.1 SOS algorithm
This algorithm was developed by [1] and consists of three (3) phases of treatment:
mutualism, commensalism and parasitism. The chart is shown in Figure 2.
Mutualism is a social system among members of the same professional branch. In other
words, it is a lasting and complementary relationship between two groups of plants, animals or
human beings. Commensalism is an association of different species living in such a way that one
of them profits from the others without the latter having a disadvantage. Commensalism is
therefore different from parasitism. Parasitism is closely related to predation. In this system, two
organisms live together, one pulling his food at the expense of the other. Parasites, which are
smaller than their hosts, include viruses and bacteria. Because of this dependency, parasites do
not usually kill their hosts, unlike predators with their prey. As a result, parasites and their hosts
live in mutual tolerance, although parasites sometimes regulate certain populations, decreasing
their reproductive capacity and modifying their behavior [2].

6
 1.Ecosytem Initialisation
Set number of organisms (ecosize), termination criterion,max_iter,
max_fit_eval, establish initial ecosystem and initial best organism (Xbest);
num_iter={} and num_fit_eval={}

num_iter=num_iter+1; i=1

2. Mutualism Phase
Select one organism randomly, Xj, where Xj Xi

Determine mutual relationship vector (Mutual_Vector) benefit

factor(BF)
Mutual_Vector=(Xi+Xj)/2
BF1=random number either 1or 2; BF2=random number either 1or 2;

Modify organism Xi and Xj based on their mutual relationship

Xi nov=Xi+rand(0,1)*(Xbest - Mutual_Vector*BF1)
Xj nov=Xj+rand(0,1)*(Xbest - Mutual_Vector*BF2)

Calculate fitness value of the modified organisms;

num_fit_eval=num_fit_eval + 2

No Yes
Are the modified organisms
fitter than the previous?
Reject the modified Accept the modified
organims and keep the organims to replace the
previous previous

3. Commensalism Phase
Select one organism randomly, Xj, where Xj Xi

Modify organism Xi with the assist of organism Xj

Xi nov=Xi+rand(-1,1)*(Xbest-Xj)

Calcutate fitness value of the new organism;

num_fit_eval=num_fit_eval+1

No Is the modified organism Yes

fitter than the previous?

Reject Xi nov and Accept Xi nov to

keep Xi replace Xi i=i+1

4. Parasitism Phase

Select one organism randomly, Xj, where Xj Xi

Create Parasite_Vector by duplicating Organism Xi and modofiying the

randomly selected dimensions with uniform random numbers

Calcutate Fitness value of the Parasite_Vector

num_fit_eval=num_fit_eval+1

No Yes
Is Parasite_Vector fitter than
organism Xj?

Keep organism Xj and Replace organism Xj

reject Parasite_Vector Parasite_Vector

5. Update the best organism (Xbest)

No
6. i=ecosize?

Yes
No
7. Is termination criteria acheved?
(num_iter >max_iter and num_fit_eval>max_fit_eval)

Yes
Optimal Solution (Xbest)

Figure 2 : Chart of the SOS algorithm [1]

7
Explanation of the SOS algorithm

Min-Yuan Cheng and Doddy Prayogo [1] developed the SOS algorithm in 2014. The
description is as follows:

- Mutualism phase

In this phase Xi, Xj are the two random organisms, which interact with in themselves so as
to enhance their chances of survival. The new candidate solutions for Xi and Xj are given in
equation (12) and (13) [1].

Xinew=Xi+rand(0,1)*(Xbest - Mutual_Vector*BF1) (12)

Xjnew= Xj + rand(0,1)*(Xbest - Mutual_Vector*BF2) (13)

𝑋𝑋𝑖𝑖+ 𝑋𝑋𝑗𝑗
Where Mutual_Vector = 2

- Commensalism phase

Similar to mutualism phase two random organisms Xi and Xj from the ecosystem are
allowed to interact in commensalism phase. In this interaction organism Xi benefits from the
interaction, but organism Xj neither benefit nor suffers from the relationship. The new candidate
solution of Xi is calculated, which is modelled in equation (14) as [1]

Xinew= Xi + rand(-1,1)*(Xbest - Xj) (14)

- Parasitism phase

In parasitism phase, one of the randomly selected organisms from the ecosystem Xi acts
as a “Parasite-Vector”. The duplicating organism Xi creates the parasite_vector and, modified by

8
a random number. The newly formed parasite fights for survival with the organism Xj. If Xj has
lesser fitness than the parasite, then the parasite kills the organism Xj and takes its place in the
ecosystem [1].

3.2 PSO algorithm

This method is a stochastic optimization technique based on a particle population ; a
swarm gathers several particles (individuals). Each particle makes its decision using its own
experience and the experiences of their neighborhood. The PSO is inspired by the social behavior
of the swarms of birds and the pews which tend to imitate the successful behaviors they observe
in their surroundings while bringing their personal variations [10].

Explanation of the PSO algorithm

The displacement of each particle in the search space, is based on its current position and
the update of its speed [10].

(15)
𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖𝑘𝑘+1 = 𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖𝑘𝑘 + 𝑉𝑉𝑖𝑖𝑘𝑘+1

𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖𝑘𝑘+1 , 𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖𝑘𝑘 : Position of the particle i at iteration k+1 and k respectively

𝑉𝑉𝑖𝑖𝑘𝑘+1 : Speed of the particle i at iteration k+1.

Each particle in the swarm, changes its speed according to two essential information. One,
is related to his personal experience, which is the best position found by the particle during the
search process (pbest). The second information, concerning the best position found by the
neighbors (lbest) (or by all the swarm, in the global version of the algorithm (gbest)). This
information is obtained from the knowledge of how the other agents performed their research
[10].

The principle of change of velocity is defined by equation (16).

9
𝑣𝑣𝑖𝑖𝑘𝑘+1 = 𝑤𝑤𝑣𝑣𝑖𝑖𝑘𝑘 + 𝑐𝑐1 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟1 × �𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑖 − 𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖𝑘𝑘 � + 𝑐𝑐2 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟2 × (𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔𝑔 − 𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖𝑘𝑘 ) (16)

With :

𝑣𝑣𝑖𝑖𝑘𝑘 : speed of agent i at iteration k

w : weighting function

𝑐𝑐𝑗𝑗 : weighting factors

rand : random number between 0 and 1

𝑆𝑆𝑖𝑖𝑘𝑘 : Current Position of Agent i at Iteration k

𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑖 : best position found by particle i so far;

gbest : best position found by the swarm so far.

The weighting function w is given by equation (17):

𝑤𝑤𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 −𝑤𝑤𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚
𝑤𝑤 = 𝑤𝑤𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 − × 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 (17)
𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚

𝑤𝑤𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 : initial weight

𝑤𝑤𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 : final weight;
𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 : number of iterations
𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 : current iteration.

The organizational chart of the PSO is given in Figure 3.

10
 Initialization of the particles and the parameters of the PSO algorithm
Dimension of the search space (dim); creation of particles (n); random initialization of speed
(vold); creation of a Pbest; introduction of a selected gbest randomly ; iter_max ; wmax ;
wmin ; r1=rand(n,dim) ; r2=rand(n,dim) ;

Establish the incidence matrix

Calculate the fitness function for the Pbest

iter=iter+1

Specification of the coefficient « Weight »

wmax=wmax-(wmax-wmin)*iter/iter max

Update of the speed of each particle

Vnew(i,j) = w*Vnew(i,j) + c1 + r1(i,j) * (Pbest(i,j) + c2 + r2(i,j) *
(gbest(j) - X(i,j)

Update the position of each particle

Xnew(i,j)=X(i,j)+Vnew(i,j)

Calculate the fitness functions for each particle

Is the network
radial?
Reject the particle Keep the particle
No Yes

Update of the Pbest

fitness(k)<fPbest(k) ; Pbest(k, :)=X( k , :) ;
fPbest(k)=fitness(k) ; k=1 : n

Calculate fitness fonction of the gbest et update of the gbest

fPbest(k) < fgbest(k) ; gbest = Pbest ; k=1 : n

No The criteria are met?

iter > iter_max

Yes
Show the result

Figure 3 : Chart of the PSO algorithm

11
 3.3 HSOS Algorithm
The chart of this method is given in Figure 4.

Initialization of decision variables and SOS parameters

Calculate the losses of the

initial configuration

Determine an optimal
configuration by the SOS
algorithm

Calculate of losses of the

configuration obtained by
the algorithm SOS

Binary coding of new

decision variable

Initialization of the parameters of the PSO

Determine an optimal
configuration by the PSO
algorithm

Check that the network

configuration obtained is radial

Calculate of losses of the

configuration obtained by the
algorithm PSO

Binary coding of new decision variables

Show the result

Figure 4: Chart of the HSOS algorithm

12
Explanation of the HSOS algorithm

Step 1: Initialization of decision variables and SOS parameters.

Step 2: Calculation of active power losses before reconfiguration.

Step 3: Determine the optimal configuration using the SOS algorithm.

Step 4: Calculation of the active power losses of the optimal configuration obtained by the SOS
algorithm.
Step 5: Binary coding of decision variables.
Step 6: Initialization of the parameters of the PSO, use of the optimal organism of the SOS like
initial vector of the PSO.
Step 7: Determine the optimal configuration by the PSO algorithm.
Step 8: Calculation of the active power losses of the optimal configuration obtained by the PSO
algorithm.
Step 9: Binary coding of decision variables.
Step 10: Presentation of the result.

4. Results and Discussion

The optimization program is developed with Matlab 2016a. The characteristics of the
computer used are 2.20 GHz processor, 4 GB RAM and a 64 bite WINDOWS 8 operating
system.

Each element of the decision variable vector corresponds to the state of a switch between
two nodes (branch).

4.1. Presentation of the Test Network

The structure of the IEEE 33 nodes network used is given in Figure 5.

13
 0
S1
1
S2
18 2
S1 S22
19 S19 3 S3 22

S20 4 S4 23
20 S23
S5 24
6 5 S24
S33
S21 S25 S37
21 S7 25
7 S28
S8 S26 S2 S29
9 8 27 28
S35 26 29
10 S9 S3
S10
S34 S3 30
S1 14
11 31
S15 15 S3
S12 S14
12 S13 32
13 S16 S36
S1
16 17
Load or Node
Sectionalizing switch
Tie switch

Figure 5: Presentation of the IEEE 33 nodes network [3]

4.2. Results

The rms value of the voltage at node 0 of the network is 12.66 kV. The total active power
and total reactive are 3715 kW and 2300 kVAr respectively; these data are taken in [3]. The
characteristics of the network and the load power are given in [3].

In this study, the binary code is S1 to S37 and read from left to right.

The following binary code representing the state of the switches before reconfiguration is
given in Figure 6.

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
1

Figure 6: Initial organism of the IEEE 33 bus network

In implementing the optimization program, the optimal reconfiguration binary code is
given in Figure 7.

14
1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0

Figure 7: Optimal organism obtained with the HSOS algorithm

Table 1 shows the results before and after reconfiguration of power distribution network.

Table 1: IEEE 33 bus network reconfiguration by HSOS algorithm

Before reconfiguration After reconfiguration

Open switches Losses power (kW) Reduction Open switches Losses power (kW) Reduction

S33, S34, S35 206.8643 0% S7, S9, S14 141.5122 31.59%

S36, S37 S32 S37

This table shows the open switches and the active power losses before and after the
reconfiguration. There is a loss reduction of 31.59%.

Figure 8 shows the profile of the voltage before and after reconfiguration by applying the
proposed algorithm.

15
 1

Before Reconfig.
0.99 HSOS Reconfig.

0.98

RMS Voltage (p.u) 0.97

0.96

0.95

0.94

0.93

0.92

0.91
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Nodes

Figure 8: Voltage profile before and after reconfiguration by the HSOS algorithm

This figure shows a remarkable minimization of the voltage deviation at each node.

The network reconfiguration graph is given in Figure 9.

16
 0

1
18 2
19 3 22

4 23
20
24
6 5

21 25
7

9 28
8 26 27 29
10

30
14
11 31
15

12 32
13

16 17
Load ou node
Close branch
Open branch

Figure 9: Optimal configuration by the HSOS algorithm

Table 2 presents a comparative study between the proposed algorithm and those found in
the literature.

17
 Table 2: Comparative study of the results of other algorithms

Methods Open switches Losses power (kW) Vde (p.u) Vmin (p.u)

Initial S33, S34, S35, S36, S37 206.8643 0.0870 0.9130

HSOS S7, S9, S14, S32, S37 141.5122 0.0625 0.9375
SOS S22, S23, S24, S30, S31, 178.5238 1 0
S32, S33, S34, S35, S37

ITS [4] S7, S9, S14, S36 S37 145.11 0.0664 0.9336
HSA [5] S7, S10, S14, S28, S36 146.39 0.0664 0.9336

This table presents a comparative study with SOS algorithm and some algorithms of the
literature.

4.3. Discussion

Initially, losses power are estimated at 206.8643 kW. Applying our algorithm, the open
switches are S7, S9, S14, S32 and S37. The other switches are closed. This corresponds to the
online active power loss of 141.5122 kW. The reconfiguration of the network by the HSOS
algorithm implemented with Matlab allows to obtain an optimal configuration which minimizes
the losses of active power by reducing them by 31.59% of the initial losses s is 65.3521 kW,
which is not insignifiant. The rms value of the voltage at each node respects the voltage
constraint set.

Table 2 presents a comparative study of the results obtained by other methods of

optimizing the literature. In view of this, the proposed new algorithm provides better solutions.
The rate of reduction of power losses in line and the voltage profile are satisfactory. This
confirms the effectiveness of this proposed method. Additionally c and algorithm converges
fasterment compared to others.

18
5. Conclusion
A new optimization approach based on Hybrid Symbiotic organism Search has been
studied and applied for the reconfiguration of an electrical power distribution network for the
minimization of active power losses in line and the voltage deviation at each node. This
technique is used on an IEEE 33 node network.
The results obtained show that this new method is very efficient for the reduction of
power losses and voltage drops online.
A comparative study with other algorithms of the literature, shows that the HSOS is very
effective.

References

[1] Min-Yuan Cheng, Doddy Prayogo, Symbiotic Organisms Search: A new metaheuristic
optimization algorithm, Computers and structures, 2014, 98-112.

[2] Alexandre Teplaira Boum, Patrik Roger Ndjependa, Jacquie Ngo Bisse, Optimal
reconfiguration of power systems based on Symbiotic Organism Search, Journal of power and
energy engineering, vol. 5, November 2017.

[3] Chun Wang, Hao Zhong Cheng, Optimization of Network configuration in large distribution
systems using Plant Growth simulation Algorithm, IEEE transactions on power systems, vol. 23,
No. 1, February2008.

[4] Thuan Thanh Nguyen, Anh Viet Truong, Distribution network reconfiguration for power loss
minimization and voltage profile improvement using cuckoo search algorithm, Electrical Power
and Energy Systems 68 (2015) 233–242.

[5]Srinivasa Rao Rayapudi, Venkata Lakshmi, Narasimham Sadhu, Ramalinga Raju Manyala,
Srinivasa Rao A. Optimal network reconfiguration of large-scale distribution system using
harmony search algorithm. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2011;26(3):1080–8.

[6] Kashem. Muttaqi, Velappa Ganapathy, G B. Jasmon, M Buhari, A novel method for loss
minimization in distribution networks , University of Wollongong, Faculty of Engineering and
Information Sciences, 2000.

19
[7] Taher Niknam, an efficient hybrid evolutionary algorithm based on PSO and HBMO
algorithms for multi-objective Distribution Feeder Reconfiguration, Energy Conversion and
Management, vol 50, August 2000, pages 2074-2082.

[8] LI Zhen-kun, CHEN Xing-ying, YU Kun, LIU Hao-ming, ZHAO Bo, Hybrid Particle Swarm
Optimization for Distribution Network Reconfiguration, College of Electrical Engineering, Hohai
University, 2008.

[9] Zhenkun Li, Xingying Chen, Kun Yu, Yi Sun, Haoming Liu, a hybrid Particle Swarm
Optimization approach for distribution network reconfiguration problem, IEEE Power and
Energy Socety General Meeting in the 21 st Century, 20-24 July 2008.

[10] R. Eberhart and J. Kennedy, Particle Swarm Optimization Proc. Of IEEE International Conf.
on Neural Networks, vol 4, pp. 1942-1948, 1995.

20
21
22