Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

An Artificial Intelligence based scheduling algorithm for demand-side energy

management in Smart Homes
Helder R.O. Rocha a ,∗, Icaro H. Honorato a , Rodrigo Fiorotti b , Wanderley C. Celeste a ,
Leonardo J. Silvestre a , Jair A.L. Silva a
a
Federal University of Espírito Santo, Vitória-ES, Brazil
b Federal Institute of Espírito Santo, São Mateus-ES, Brazil

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: A new methodology, that combine three different Artificial Intelligence techniques, is proposed in this paper
Demand planning to solve the energy demand planning in Smart Homes. Conceived as a multi-objective scheduling problem,
Elitist Non-dominated Sorting Genetic the new method is developed to reach the compromise between energy cost and the user comfort. Using an
Algorithm II
Elitist Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II, the concept of demand-side management is applied taking
Support Vector Regression
into account electricity price fluctuations over time, priority in the use of equipment, operating cycles and
K-means
a battery bank. The demand-side management also considers a forecast of a distributed generation for a day
ahead, employing the Support Vector Regression technique. Validated by numerical simulations with real data
obtained from a smart home, the user comfort levels were determined by the K-means clustering technique. The
efficiency of the proposed Artificial Intelligence combination was proved according to a 51.4% cost reduction,
when Smart Homes with and without distributed generation and battery bank are compared.

1. Introduction energy, a reduction in the cost of energy generated by alternative

The current model of the electricity supply is inefficient because the
generation is performed centrally in large power plants electricity. In
this circumstance, the energy needs to be transmitted over long dis-
tances and distributed to consumer units, spending up many resources
on the construction, maintenance of all systems involved and high
levels of technical losses [1]. In addition, centralized generation tech-
nologies generally causes more environmental impacts than distributed
generation ones. From the consumer’s perspective, especially among
small and medium-sized consumers, electric energy has been used in
an unintelligent way and practically without control. Added to these
two perspectives, it is worth highlighting the fact that electricity has
become increasingly expensive [2].
Facing this reality, Distributed Generation (DG) and Smart Grid (SG)
emerges as new paradigms of electricity supply and consumption. These
concepts are becoming more present in electric energy markets around
the world. According to [1], DG can be defined as a generating source,
small-sized, connected directly to the distribution system (low voltage
consumer network). Among the main DG technologies, it highlights the
Microgrids [2], which have allowed the development of the Smart Grids
concept [3].
SGs are Microgrids with communication and control systems be-
tween their elements, providing an optimized use of the produced
sources, and an improving in the quality of the energy and the effi-
ciency of the electric grid. They also provide reductions in technical
losses, as well as in the greenhouse gas emissions. On the other hand,
this new network configuration is more complex, mainly when it
reaches high penetration levels of DGs, demanding new procedures of
operation, control, planning, and network protection.
The Smart Home (SH) concept is part of the smart grid paradigm,
incorporating smartness into dwellings to get more comfort with the
minimum energy expenditure possible. One of the problems to be
dealt with in a SG/SH is the Demand-Side Management (DSM), which
consists of planning, implementing and monitoring actions by the Dis-
tribution Network Operator (DNO), whose purpose is to allow greater
control of the user over his energy consumption to promote the efficient
use of electricity.
The most common actions of a DSM are load management, strategic
conservation, power generation by the consumer and replacement of
obsolete equipment with newer and more efficient. DSM programs can
be divided into two categories, namely: the direct DSM, in which the
DNO determines the loads to be disconnected or reduced, according to
conditions specified in an interruption contract with the consumer; and
the indirect DSM, where the consumer changes his demand in response

∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: helder.rocha@ufes.br (H.R.O. Rocha).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.116145
Received 13 July 2020; Received in revised form 24 October 2020; Accepted 28 October 2020
Available online 10 November 2020
0306-2619/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
H.R.O. Rocha et al.
to price signals generated by the DNO [4]. The last one is the focus of
this work.
1.1. Related works
Several works in the literature addressed some of the problems
emerged from DSM. Performance comparisons between DSM for in-
dividual users and cooperative consumers, between deterministic and
stochastic DSMs, as well as between day-ahead and real-time DSMs
were made in [5]. The authors of [6] focused in DSM for user-side load
control in order to balance, more effectively, the demand-side with the
supply side, thus reducing demand peak. In the work presented in [7],
the approach focus was in a load allocation among different classes of
devices. The allocated electricity resources are demand, priority and
fairness, and the system has an energy storage to reserve energy during
low-price times to be used during high-price times. The implemented
algorithm reduces the peak demand and increases the efficiency of the
system.
In [8], Kai et al. present a power scheduling problem for residential
consumers with two types of electric appliances. One has a flexible
starting time and works continuously with a fixed power, and the
second works with a flexible power in a predefined working time. The
optimization problem demonstrated the tradeoff between the payments
and the discomfort. The authors of [9] consider a multi-residence with
multiple classes of appliances operating in a distributed manner, such
that each residence solves its own subproblem and reports only limited
information to the system. The algorithm provided a near-optimal
solution of the multi-residential DR problem.
Scheduling algorithms for different users and priorities based on
energy demand in a real-time pricing has been studied in [10]. In
order to minimize the electricity and comfort maximization, two al-
gorithms were proposed and the results validated the effectiveness of
the proposed algorithms. Marzban proposed in [11] a hybrid DSM
algorithm based on multi-layer and colony optimization. The optimum
operation of the sources decreased the electricity production cost by
hourly day-ahead and real-time scheduling. The algorithm based on
Lyapunov optimization suggested in [12] for load scheduling at a
residential with integrated renewable generation and energy storage,
provided performance improvements and cost reductions. In [13], the
authors does a comparative evaluation in the performance of DSM
using Genetic algorithm, binary particle swarm optimization and ant
colony optimization, considering efficiency in terms of electricity bill
reduction, peak to average ratio minimization and user comfort level
maximization.
Metaheuristics were used in [14] and [15] to optimize the energy
management of a system composed of renewable energy source and
energy storage that supply a smart home. Energy consumption and
comfort that takes the human being’s preferences into consideration
were managed in [14], in a way that the consumption is modified
in response to the real-time price signal. Energy consumption as well
as the PAR were reduced in [15], considering a DSM designed with
exogenous grid signals, day-ahead pricing signals, ambient temperature
and solar irradiance.
Four metaheuristic algorithms were combined in [16] to design a
DSM that reduces the energy consumption and maximizes user com-
fort, whereas in [17], Hussain et al. evaluated a DSM based on a
Genetic harmony search algorithm to reduce electricity expense and
peak to average ratio, and to maximize user comfort. The algorithm
implemented in [17] achieved higher search efficiency and a dynamic
capability to attain optimal solutions in single and multiple homes.
In its turn, the study described in [18] show high-cost savings with
minimum user PAR, using a binary hybrid optimization through the
Multiple Knapsack Problem technique. Their proposal helped the effort
of finding an optimal solution, while employing dynamic programming
and respecting the total capacity of available time. In the meantime,
Rahim et al. proposed in [19] a bacterial harmony algorithm for a
2
Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145
DSM problem with coordination among smart appliances using the
dynamic programming approach. The coordination was achieved by
data generated from the appliances of multiple homes, employing
heuristics. The resultant coordination reduced the electricity cost and
increased the user comfort.
An overview that considers the implementation of Computational
Intelligence and Machine Learning strategies in DSMs is provided
in [20], and in [21] the authors modeled 30 homes with different
sizes, lengths of operational time, and appliance power ratings. Some
homes have a renewable energy sources and a battery storage units.
The authors of [22] presented a survey where the studies are clas-
sified into exact algorithms and metaheuristics to address the power
scheduling problem in a smart home. The smart home system is
modeled based on dynamic energy pricing schemes to motivate users
to schedule their smart home appliances. A Variable Neighborhood
Search (VNS) metaheuristic was proposed in [23] in a DSM based on
the cooperative combination of activity plans. The method does not
depend on the installation of load-control devices, neither in knowledge
of the user about electricity or tariffs. The VNS optimization search
plans that minimize both the cost of energy and discomfort. Rasheed
et al. described in [24] an intelligent multi-agent based multilayered
hierarchical control system for residential load management, under
real-time pricing environment. The major objectives was to reduce peak
load demand, electricity cost, and user discomfort. In [25], a DSM
was proposed to analyze the usage behavior of consumers from their
historical data, and to predict the demand for energy-using time series
analysis.
In [26], Arabul et al. presented an energy management algorithm
for wind-PV-battery-FC hybrid power system to reduce hydrogen con-
sumption in a smart home. The proposed algorithm uses a fuzzy-logic
based controller to reduce fuel consumption, with a minimum effect on
user comfort levels. Their results show that the load demand supplied
by the PV and the wind power is increased by 2% and 2.5%, re-
spectively, whereas the annual hydrogen consumption reduced by 4%.
The authors of [27] presented a mixed-integer quadratic-programming
predictive control for a smart home that considers PV power, energy
storage, shift-able loads, as well as a thermal heating model. Their main
objective was the minimization of energy cost, ensuring the thermal
comfort of the user. A Fuzzy logic and a heuristic optimization were
employed to control the throttleable and interruptible appliances, as
well as the schedule of shiftable appliances in the smart grid examined
in [28]. The simulation results provided in [28] show a reduction of
energy costs and peak of demand.
The authors of [29] proposed a multiobjective optimization that
employs the NSGA-II to compute compromise solutions, by balancing
the minimization of energy and power total cost with the dissatisfaction
caused to the users. Their smart home model include the grid, the local
energy production and four types of manageable loads. The proposed
algorithm was evaluated in a scenario that contemplates contracted
power with known fixed costs and limits on the power requested from
the grid, and in another with power charges that varies according to
the peak power requested from the grid.
The energy scheduling method, proposed in [30], was evaluated in
an SH regarding both residents’ goals (costs and comfort) and utilities
goals (PAR improvement). In [31], Luo et al. suggested a DSM that
minimizes the home’s one-day electricity cost charged by the real-time
pricing. This approach took into account operational constraints of
household appliances, to ensure the user’s comfort. However it does
not provides a metric to determine the users comfort and does not
seek to maximize it. More recently, the authors of [32] proposed a
methodology to mitigate risks, considering technical and economic
aspects in the transition from traditional houses to Smart Homes.
Economic Predictive Control Models were used in [33] and [34] to
optimize the energy management of Microgrids (see [35] for further
details) composed of renewable energy sources and energy storage
that include the grid connection and disconnection functionalities.
H.R.O. Rocha et al.
The computational performance of the methods described in [33]
and [34] are suitable for online operation in time intervals of 10 and
15 min, respectively. Nevertheless, it should be stressed that the specific
Microgrid characteristics found in [35] are not considered in this work.
The methodologies proposed in the above-mentioned related works
does not consider equipment real data, social class, climatic seasons and
grouping techniques in the generation of the user’s comfort matrix. It is
in this context that, in this article, we propose the k-means technique to
creates a comfort matrix using data obtained from real Smart Homes,
thus providing a realistic DSM methodology to the specific addressed
problem. This is, indeed, the main contribution of this work.
1.2. Our contributions
The DSM methodology proposed in this article considers a daily
electric energy price curve with a variation that reflects typical situ-
ations of energy supply and demand. Two micro-generators based on
wind and solar energy sources are contemplated, which means that
the formed distributed generation system is influenced by climatic
parameters such as ambient temperature, wind speed, air humidity,
pressure, cloudiness and solar radiation. Therefore, the contributions
of this work include: (I) the proposition of a forecast of the hybrid
generation capacity, which is done for a day ahead by an artificial
neural network based on an SVR that make use of climatic information
and mathematical models of the wind and photovoltaic generator to
train the forecaster; (II) the implementation of a new and simple
technique used to obtain the user’s comfort, which is determined
by the K-means grouping with data obtained from real SHs; (III) a
reformulated optimization based on NSGA-II to specifically solve the
presented problem, allowing a high monetary reduction of the energy
paid by the final consumer, according to the comfort desired by the
tenants of the residence; and (IV) the evaluation of a new algorithm
proposed to manage a battery bank, aiming energy cost reduction and
comfort improvement in the considered Smart Homes.
The rest of the article is organized in 8 sections. More details about
the implemented DSM are presented in Section 2 and the module used
in the power forecasting by DG using SVR is described in Section 3. Sec-
tions 4 and 5 demonstrate the algorithm that manages the battery and
the construction of the comfort matrix, respectively. Section 6 contains
the formulation of the optimization problem and the modifications
made in the NSGA-II to address the problem. The simulations results
are commented in Section 7 and the concluded remarks provided in
Section 8.
2. The implemented demand-side management
The DSM used in the proposed methodology consists of systems
that modify the load curve, by changing consumer habits with stimuli
provided by electricity distributors. To change energy consumption
habits, these stimuli include variant tariffs in time, control and au-
tomation systems of the electricity grid, to assist the decision-making
process. The implemented Demand Curve Management and Control
System (DCMCS) is shown in Fig. 1.
The DCMCS receives information related to the amount of en-
ergy generated by DG; to the energy consumed in extensions; to the
consumer financial availability; to the current tariff, which is the
instantaneous amount paid for energy purchased from DNO; and to
the energy purchased via the distribution network, resulting in on/off
operations on the consumer branches and on the DG, as well as on the
branch that connects the distribution network to the SHs.
To provide the electrical power, the micro DG (𝜇DG) treated in the
new methodology is composed of 𝐾 microgenerators based on seasonal
sources that depend on meteorological variables. Therefore, we faced
with the problem of forecasting the internal generation capacity of
a 𝜇DG. The mathematical model of the 𝜇DG, as well as the set of
meteorological variables used to meet the model, and the learning
system based on artificial intelligence techniques are described in the
next Section.
3
Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145
3. Forecasting the power generated by the 𝝁DG
Data from the internal generation module and the weather station
are stored in a database to be used in training and configuration of
the demand forecast [36]. Initially, due to the lack of energy produc-
tion data from the 𝜇DG, the mathematical models of the wind and
photovoltaic generator were used to train the forecaster.
3.1. The powers generated by the wind turbine and the photovoltaic panels
Among the several models used to determine the power generated
by wind machines [37], the polynomial power curve and the least-
squares (LS) methods are the most usual [38]. Thus, in this work, the
model based on LS with a 9-degree polynomial was chosen, as seen in
Eq. (1). Data from the wind turbine’s manual and the Matlab’s polyfit
tool, which is used to model a curve, were used to determine the
coefficients of the 9-degree polynomial in the wind power determined
as
⎧0, 0 ≤ 𝑉 < 𝑉𝑖
⎪
𝑃𝑤 = ⎨(𝑎 × 𝑉 9 ) + ⋯ + (𝑖 × 𝑉 ) + 𝑗, 𝑉𝑖 ≤ 𝑉 < 𝑉0 (1)
⎪
⎩0, 𝑉 ≥ 𝑉0 ,
where 𝑉 is the wind speed, 𝑉𝑖 is the cut-in speed, 𝑉0 is the cut-out speed
and 𝑎, … , 𝑗 are the coefficients of the polynomial.
The modeling process proposed in [39] was applied to model the
power generated by the pannels, which is a function of the solar
irradiation incident on the modules and the ambient temperature. This
method obtains the parameters through meteorological measurements
and the panel manufacturer’s manual. Hence, the power generated by
the photovoltaic panels calculated as
𝑁 × 𝐹𝐹 × 𝑉
𝑃𝑝 = , (2)
𝐼
𝑉𝑚𝑝𝑝𝑡 −𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑝𝑡
for 𝑁 the number of photovoltaic panels, 𝐹 𝐹 = 𝑉𝑜𝑐 −𝐼𝑠𝑐
a dimen-
sionless form factor, 𝑉 = 𝑉𝑜𝑐 − 𝐾𝑣 (𝑇𝑐 − 25) is the voltage in the
photovoltaic module and 𝐼 = 𝑟[𝐼𝑠𝑐 + 𝐾𝑖 (𝑇𝑐 − 25)] the current in a
𝑁 −20
cell. The parameter 𝑇𝑐 = 𝑇𝑎 + 𝑟( 𝑜𝑡0.8 ) represents the photovoltaic
panel temperature in ◦ C, for 𝑇𝑎 the average environment temperature
in the period, 𝑟 the solar irradiation in kW/m2 and 𝑁𝑜𝑡 the nominal cell
operating temperature. In these equations, 𝐼𝑠 𝑐 is the cell short circuit
current, 𝐾𝑖 is a current/temperature coefficient, 𝑉𝑜𝑐 is the open circuit
voltage of the module, 𝐾𝑣 is the stress temperature coefficient in 𝑉 ∕◦ C,
𝑉𝑚𝑝𝑝𝑡 is the voltage at the point of maximum power and 𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑝𝑡 represents
the current at the point of maximum power. The total electrical power
of the 𝜇DG, composed by the sum of the 𝐾 = 2 microgenerators is
obtained as 𝑃𝜇𝐷𝐺 = 𝑃𝑤 + 𝑃𝑝 .
3.2. Generation of the forecasting system using support vector regression
In order to achieve the forecasting goal, the meteorological data
and the internal generation capacity, obtained in the mathematical
model described in this Section, are utilized in the SVR. Therefore, it is
necessary to know the meteorological history in the region where the
𝜇DG is located.
To perform the computational experiments with the SVR neural
network, data were obtained from a meteorological station located in
the São Mateus Campus of the Federal University of Espírito Santo
(UFES). The hourly meteorological data correspond to 20.208 entry
patterns. Each pattern contains the variables date, time in UTC, average
temperature in ◦ C, average relative humidity in %, mean pressure
in hPa, wind speed in m/s, wind direction, wind gust in m/s and
irradiation in kW/m2 .
Initially, the power generated was simulated based on using Eqs.
(1) and (2), considering the data of each input pattern measured by
the weather station, as well as some information provided by the
H.R.O. Rocha et al.
Fig. 1. The demand curve management and control system evaluated in the methodology proposed in this paper. The DCMCS is composed by 𝐾 microgenerators based on seasonal
sources, as well as by a battery bank and equipment energy consumption.
datasheets of the Wind Turbine and the Photovoltaic Panels. In the
𝜇DG simulation, a total peak power of 8.0 kW was considered. Then,
the total power values were shifted within 24 h, forming a complete
pattern that contains meteorological data measured by the station in
hour 𝑘 of day 𝐷 (SVR input) and the total simulated power in hour 𝑘
of day 𝐷 + 1 (desired SVR output). The input and the output data were
normalized, in the range between 0 and 1, according to the minimum
and maximum limits identified in each variable. In sequence, the data
were separated into two sets: the first set (80% of the data) was used
to train the SVR and the second with 20% of the data to test it.
3.3. A basic description of the support vector regression technique
Support Vector Regression is a non-linear regression technique
based on the Support Vector Machines proposed in [40]. Both tech-
niques are firmly based on the theory of statistical learning, that allows
the optimal generalization of unseen data. The learning process of an
SVR-type ANN considers a training set (𝑥1 , 𝑦1 )...(𝑥𝑙 , 𝑦𝑙 ), 𝑥 ∈ 𝑅𝑑 , 𝑦 ∈
𝑅𝑑 , where 𝑥 denominates the input space and 𝑦 the output space of the
set [41].
The objective of the SVR is to find a function 𝑓 (𝑥) that presents
at most one deviation 𝜖 from the target values. In other words, it
looks for a function with an error margin characterized by the interval
[𝑦𝑖 − 𝜖, 𝑦𝑖 + 𝜖], as following
𝑓 (𝑥) = ⟨𝑤, 𝑥⟩ + 𝑏
where ⟨., .⟩ denotes the internal product over the space 𝑅𝑑 ,
𝑤 is the
vector of the weights ∈ 𝑅𝑑 and 𝑏 ∈ 𝑅. The problem can be formulated
as the following convex optimization problem
1 • (3) Shift the total power values within 24 h to form a complete
𝐌𝐢𝐧 ‖𝑤‖2
2 pattern. This pattern contains meteorological data measured by
𝐒.𝐭.
1. 𝑦𝑖 − (𝑤 ⋅ 𝑥𝑖 ) − 𝑏 ≤ 𝜖; ∀𝑖 = 1, … , 𝑙
2. −𝑦𝑖 + (𝑤 ⋅ 𝑥𝑖 ) + 𝑏 ≤ 𝜖; ∀𝑖 = 1, … , 𝑙.
Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145
Thus, the function that solves the problem is
∑
𝑙
𝑓 (𝑥) = (𝛼𝑖 − 𝛼𝑖∗ )𝑘 ⟨𝑥𝑖 , 𝑥⟩ , (5)
𝑖=1
where 𝛼𝑖 , 𝛼𝑖∗ ∈ [0, 𝐶] are the Lagrange multipliers and 𝑘 ⟨𝑥𝑖 , 𝑥⟩ is the
kernel function (non-linear).
It is important to note that the results obtained by the SVR depend
significantly on the values of the regularization constant C, the margin
𝜖, the type of kernel function and its respective parameters. Functions
that fit the analyzed problem’s data are obtained according to the
selection of such variables. The chosen kernel function is a radial
base function (RBF), which is the most complex among the functions
normally used in SVRs, but also the most general [40].
3.4. The SVR procedure used in the power forecasting of the next day
It is important to noticed that, in this work, the SVR procedure was
employed to forecast the power of the 𝜇DG a day ahead. The steps that
constitute the entire procedure are described as follows:
• (1) Select the 20,208 entry patterns from the meteorological
data history to train and test the SVR. Each pattern contains the
variables date, time in UTC, average temperature in ◦ C, average
relative humidity in %, mean pressure in hPa, wind speed in m/s,
wind direction, wind gust in m/s and irradiation in kW/m2 .
(3) • (2) Calculate the power generated by the 𝜇DG using Eqs. (1) and
(2), considering the average temperature, the wind speed and the
irradiation presented in the meteorological data history. Some
information provided by the datasheets of the Wind Turbine and
the Photovoltaic Panels are also used in this calculation.
(4)
the station in hour 𝑘 of day 𝐷 and the total power in hour 𝑘 of
day 𝐷 + 1.
• (4) Normalize the input and output data.
4
H.R.O. Rocha et al.
• (5) Separate the 20,208 data patterns into two sets. Use the first
set, composed by 80% of the data, to train the SVR according to
Eq. (5). Use the second (test set), with 20% of the data, to validate
the SVR, considering mean square error (MSE) and a root mean
square error (RMSE) as performance metrics.
4. The battery bank management
As mentioned, the battery bank is the energy storage system used
in the SHs, to promote greater flexibility in the energy management.
When 𝜇DG generates more energy than the SH is able to consume, the
excess is sold to the DNO or stored in the battery bank. It is worth
noting that this choice depends on the momentary price of the energy
and the adopted energy management control strategy. Moreover, the
battery must be charged during periods when the price of energy is
lower and/or the 𝜇DG has surplus generation. The energy should be
discharged in periods of higher price to decrease the cost of the tariff.
However, some restrictions on the battery operation procedures
must be adopted to prevent accidents and preserve its lifespan. The
restrictions considered in this article are the maximum energy the
battery can store to avoid overcharge (Ebatmax), the minimum energy
the battery must store to avoid over-discharge (Ebatmin) - which is
determined by the maximum depth of discharge adopted in the design
and the maximum charge∖discharge power (Pbatmax).
The management of the battery usage depends on the following
six main parameters: Pdiff that represents the difference between the
household charge demand and the generated power, HP that indicates
the peak time registered when the tariff is more expensive, Ebat which
is the energy present in the battery, 𝜎 that represents the self-discharge
rate of the battery, 𝜂𝑏𝑐 denoting the charge efficiency and 𝜂𝑏𝑑 rep-
resenting the discharge efficiency. The flowchart illustrated in Fig. 2
shows that the battery power management algorithm is divided into 4
sub-processes to reduce the cost of energy.
The output variable is PC, that represents the net power provided
by the public power grid. When 𝑃 𝐶 > 0 the SH consumes power
from the grid, on the other hand, when 𝑃 𝐶 < 0 the SH injects power
into the DNO network. In the beginning of the process, the parameter
Pdiff is checked, before the execution of one or more of the following
sub-processes.
Sub-process 1 - If the demand is less than the generation of re-
newable energy (𝑃 𝑑𝑖𝑓 𝑓 < 0), it is verified whether the energy the
battery can still store (𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑡) is greater than or equal to the
surplus energy produced by the renewable energy generation system,
in a fraction of 1∕6 of an hour (𝑃 𝑑𝑖𝑓 𝑓 × 𝑖). If the battery cannot store
all the energy, it will be fully charged and the power exported to
the DNO network will be (𝑃 𝑑𝑖𝑓 𝑓 − (𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑚𝑎𝑥 − 𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑡)∕𝑖). Otherwise,
the battery will be charged according to the following rules: if the
maximum battery power is greater than or equal to Pdiff module, all
excess energy will be stored in the battery and there will be no energy
consumed or exported to the DNO (𝑃 𝐶 = 0); if not, the battery will be
charged to its maximum charge rate and a 𝑃 𝑑𝑖𝑓 𝑓 + 𝑃 𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑚𝑎𝑥 amount
of electricity will be delivered to the public grid.
Sub-process 2 - If the demand is greater than the generation,
two conditions lead the system to consume the 𝑃 𝑑𝑖𝑓 𝑓 power from the
public network. The first condition is that the time in question is not the
peak, and the second it is that the time is peak and it is not possible to
use the battery because its power is minimal. If the time is the peak and
the battery energy is higher than the minimum energy, it is verified, in
each 10 min, if the energy available in the battery is greater than or
equal to 𝑃 𝑑𝑖𝑓 𝑓 .
Sub-process 3 - If 𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑡 − 𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑚𝑖𝑛 < 𝑃 𝑑𝑖𝑓 𝑓 × 𝑖, it is necessary to
obtain energy from the public grid to support the entire load demand.
Hence, If 𝑃 𝑑𝑖𝑓 𝑓 is less than the maximum battery discharge power, the
battery is discharged to the minimum energy level and the public grid
will be used to supply the remaining energy. Otherwise, it is verified if
the available energy in the battery is greater than the energy that it can
5
Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145
supply in 10 min. If this is the case, the battery will supply all possible
energy in 10 min with some energy remaining, and the public network
will be used to supply the remaining energy. If 𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑡 − 𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑚𝑖𝑛 <
𝑃 𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑚𝑎𝑥 × 𝑖, the battery will supply all the available energy, being
discharged to the minimum energy level and the public network will
be used to supply the remaining energy.
Sub-process 4 - If 𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑡−𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑚𝑖𝑛 ≥ 𝑃 𝑑𝑖𝑓 𝑓 ×𝑖, it is checked whether
𝑃 𝑑𝑖𝑓 𝑓 is less than the battery’s discharge power. If this is true, all
charge demand will be met by the battery, without the use the public
network. Otherwise, the battery will supply all possible energy in 10
min and the remaining energy will be supplied by the distribution
network.
5. Generation of the comfort matrix
The comfort matrix conceived in this work represents a weighting
of how the consumer uses the branches/electric devices during a day.
Fig. 3 shows the annual average power consumed by a dryer in a real
home, in a daily time. Preliminary analysis allows the conclusion that
the most comfortable region is between 10 am and 2 pm. However, the
generation of a comfort matrix, using artificial intelligence, permits a
more realistically representation of the user comfort, when compared
to the average consumption depicted in Fig. 3.
To quantify the user’s comfort, the metric adopted in this work was
classified in the 3 levels: maximum, average and minimum comforts.
The maximum comfort, represented by the number 3, is the schedule
that defines the moment the consumer frequently uses the electric
devices of his residence. The average comfort, denoted by the num-
ber 2, is the schedule used when the consumer sometimes uses the
branches, whereas, the minimum comfort, denoted by the number 1, is
defined by the periods when the consumer rarely uses it. To obtain
the aforementioned matrix, we apply the k-means algorithm in the
database illustrated in Fig. 3, to form clusters based on similarity. Thus,
considering this database with 𝑛 hourly loads observed over a period,
an algorithm with the following steps was suggested:
• (1) define the number of groups (𝑘 = 3 load levels);
• (2) choose the 𝑘 = 3 first load levels as centroid of 𝑘 = 3
clusters (the centroid of a group is, in this case, a load threshold
that corresponds to the arithmetic mean of the load thresholds
associated with this group);
• (3) associate each of the remaining 𝑛−𝑘 load levels in the database
to the group whose centroid is the closest, recalculating the value
of the increased group’s centroid;
• (4) go through the entire database associating each load level to
the nearest centroid cluster (when associating a load level with a
group different from the previously associated, it is necessary to
recalculate the centroid of the increased and subtracted clusters);
• (5) repeat step (4) until the observation of no more cluster
changes in any database load level;
• (6) define the regions of the highest level with value 3, average
level 2 and lowest level as 1 in the comfort matrix.
The comfort matrix is generated as the end of the algorithm and the
choice of the number of clusters must attend the compromise between
the desired quality in modeling the problem and the computational
effort the user wants to spend in the search for the optimal solution.
Table 1 illustrates a comfort matrix where it is possible to observe the
classification of the hours of the day, with the indicative indices of
comfort, as previously described.
6. Problem formulation and the proposed NSGA-II optimization
After forecasting the generation capacity and after obtaining the
user comfort levels, we modify the NSGA II Genetic algorithm to
obtain a monetary reduction in the energy consumed by an end-user,
considering the comfort sought by the tenants of a residence. The
problem formulation and the optimization procedure are described in
this Section.
H.R.O. Rocha et al. Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145

Fig. 2. The algorithm proposed to manage the energy of the battery bank. The flowchart shows that it is divided into 4 sub-processes.

Fig. 3. Annual average power in KW consumed by a dryer in a real home.

6
H.R.O. Rocha et al. Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145

Table 1 • (6), (7), (8) and (9) ensure, respectively, that 𝑃 is a vector with
Example of comfort matrix for 16 devices, indicating the indices of comfort at each
the priority of each extension where each element is an integer,
hour of the day.
in the interval {1, 3}, 𝑋 is a matrix- binary solution, 𝑍 a binary
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ⋯ 24
vector and 𝑌 represents the comfort matrix which is an integer in
Eq. 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 ⋯ 1
the interval {1, 3}.
⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯
Eq. 16 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 ⋯ 3
6.2. Optimal Pareto front solutions
Table 2
The mathematical formulation of the demand-side energy management problem. A multiobjective optimization problem provides a set of optimal
∑𝑀 [((∑𝑁 ) ) ]
Min. 𝑖=1 𝑗=1
𝑋(𝑖, 𝑗) × 𝑃𝐿 (𝑗) × 𝑇𝑢 (𝑗) − 𝑃𝜇𝐷𝐺 (𝑖) + 𝑃 𝑏𝑎𝑡(𝑖) × 𝐶(𝑖) solutions known as Pareto front, which represents the best compro-
∑𝑀 ∑𝑁
Max. 𝑖=1 𝑗=1 𝑋(𝑖, 𝑗) × 𝑌 (𝑖, 𝑗) × 𝑃 (𝑗) mise between the goals of the problem. In a multiobjective optimiza-
s.t. tion, there are two approaches normally used in handling this type of
∑𝑀
𝟏. 𝑓 =1 𝑋(𝑓 , 𝑘) = 𝐶𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑒(𝑘) × 𝐷𝑢𝑟𝐶𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑒(𝑘); 𝑘 = 1, … 𝑁 problems. Defined the priorities and the weights between the various
∑𝑀 [((∑𝑁 ) ) ]
𝟐. 𝑖=1 𝑗=1
𝑋(𝑖, 𝑗) × 𝐸𝐿 (𝑗) × 𝑇𝑢 (𝑗) − 𝑃𝜇𝐷𝐺 (𝑖) + 𝑃 𝑏𝑎𝑡(𝑖) × 𝐶(𝑖) ≤ 𝐶𝐿𝑖𝑚 objectives of interest, the first method generates the optimal solution
∑𝑀 ∑𝑁
𝟑. 𝑖=1 𝑗=1 𝑋(𝑖, 𝑗) × 𝑌 (𝑖, 𝑗) × 𝑃 (𝑗) ≤ 𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑓𝑚𝑎𝑥
∑𝑁
based on the provided information. The other method produces a
𝟒.𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑓𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝑗=1 𝑌𝑚𝑎𝑥 × 𝐶𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑒(𝑗) × 𝐷𝑢𝑟𝐶𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑒(𝑗) × 𝑃 (𝑗) set of nondominated solutions (Pareto front) and, without additional
∑𝑁
𝟓. 𝑗=1 𝑍(𝑗) ≤ 𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑥
information, chooses one of the solutions.
𝟔.𝑃 ∈ [1, 2, 3]
𝟕.𝑋 ∈ [0, 1] In a maximization problem, the Pareto mathematical definition can
𝟖.𝑌 ∈ [1, 2, 3] be, without loss of generality, described as in [42]. According to [42],
𝟗.𝑍 ∈ [0, 1] to define Pareto dominance it is convenient to assume the vectors
𝑥⃗ = (𝑥1 , 𝑥2 , … , 𝑥𝑘 ) and 𝑦⃗ = (𝑦1 , 𝑦2 , … , 𝑦𝑘 ). The vector 𝑥 dominates the
vector 𝑦 (represented as 𝑥 ≻ 𝑦) if
6.1. Problem formulation [ ] [ ]
∀𝑖 ∈ {1, 2, … , 𝑘} , 𝑓 (𝑥𝑖 ) ≥ 𝑓 (𝑦𝑖 ) ∧ ∃𝑖 ∈ 1, 2, … , 𝑘 ∶ 𝑓 (𝑥𝑖 ) . (6)

The demand optimization specified in this work is a combinato-
rial problem, subject to load allocation restrictions. The multiobjec-
tive optimization aims the designation of a solution that minimizes
electricity costs and maximizes the comfort of residents, subject to
restrictions such as operation, equipment priority, and daily fixed cost.
The problem was mathematically formulated as shown in Table 2.
In the formulation summarized in Table 2, 𝑋(𝑖, 𝑗) indicates if the 𝑗th
equipment energy consumption on time 𝑖; 𝑃𝐿 (𝑗) is the power demanded
by the 𝑗th extension of the residence; 𝑇𝑢 (𝑗) is the time spent by an
equipment in fractions of hours; 𝑃𝜇𝐷𝐺 (𝑖) is the power delivered by the
distributed generation on the time 𝑖; 𝑃 𝑏𝑎𝑡(𝑖) is the power stored by
the battery on time 𝑖; 𝐶(𝑖) is the cost of electricity purchased from
the public grid at the time 𝑖; 𝑌 (𝑖, 𝑗) represents the comfort of the 𝑗th
equipment at the time 𝑖; 𝑌𝑚𝑎𝑥 is the maximum value of the 𝑌 ; and 𝑃 (𝑗)
represents the priority of the 𝑗th extension of the residence. 𝐶𝐿𝑖𝑚 is
the daily limit cost determined by the consumer; 𝐶𝑜𝑚𝑓𝑚𝑎𝑥 expresses
the sum of the maximum comfort of all equipment; 𝑀 is the number
of parts divided into one day of an SH operation; 𝑁 is the number of
extensions into which a load of an SH can be divided; 𝐶𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑒(𝑘) shows
the number of operation cycles of the 𝑘th equipment; 𝐷𝑢𝑟𝐶𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑒(𝑘) indi-
cates the maximum duration, in number of intervals, of the operation
cycle of the 𝑘th appliance; 𝑍(𝑗) represents the amount of equipment
in operation; and 𝐿𝑚𝑎𝑥 is the maximum number of devices that can be
connected to the SH. Nine constraints were designed, considering that:
• (1) indicates that the number of operating cycles of the 𝑘th equip-
ment must acknowledge the cycle information predetermined on
it;
• (2) shows that demand plans must be generated, taking into
account that the cost limitation parameter considers the amount
that the consumer wants to pay in a day;
• (3) indicates that the comfort of a plan should be at most equals
to the maximum comfort determined by the matrix;
• (4) represents the calculation of maximum comfort as the sum
of the product between the maximum comfort value [𝑌 = 3],
the number of cycles and the duration of the cycles of each
equipment;
• (5) indicates that not all equipment needs to be used in SH,
because depending on the maximum financial value that the user
is willing to pay with the energy bill,it is necessary to restrict the
use of some equipment;
A solution 𝑥⃗ ∈ 𝑋 is called the Pareto optimal if 𝑦⃗ ∈ 𝑋 ∣ 𝐹 (𝑦)
⃗ ≻ 𝐹 (⃗
𝑥),
whereas the set that includes all non-dominated solutions is called the
Pareto optimal set, and it is defined as
𝑃𝑠 ∶= {𝑥, 𝑦 ∈ 𝑋 ∣ ∃𝐹 (𝑦) ≻ 𝐹 (𝑥)} . (7)
The set composed by the results of the objective functions of the
Pareto optimal solutions is called the Pareto optimal front and it is
mathematically designated as
{ }
𝑃𝑓 ∶= 𝐹 (𝑥) ∣ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑃𝑠 . (8)
Therefore, a multiobjective optimization obtains an optimal set of
Pareto that normally contains more than one element, unlike single-
objective optimization that provides an unitary solution. To address
the DSM problem discussed in this article, the work described in [43]
provided an economic and environmental analysis, whereas in [44], the
authors managed the trade-off between electricity bill and waiting time
of appliances shifting, according to a defined electricity load pattern.
The DSM designed in [45] consider the energy costs of residential users
and the load factor of the underlying grid, and in [46], the authors tried
to minimizes energy costs and maximizes privacy protection. It is worth
noting that all these works have proposed multiobjective formulations
with Pareto front, as well as weighted monobjective formulations. Their
conclusions claimed that the weighted monobjective formulations are
not able to give the best values for both considered objectives. It
should be stressed that the Pareto fronts generated by the monobjective
approaches were made by varying the values of the weight 𝜔 from
0 to 1. The results obtained after comparisons with the Pareto fronts
generated by multiobjective algorithms show better performances of
the multiobjective optimizations in the knee regions.
The knee point in the optimal Pareto front refers to the point with
the maximum marginal rates of return. This means that there is a small
improvement in an objective, accompanied by severe degradation of at
least one of the other objectives [47,48]. In addition, it was proved that
the knee point is better than the other points of the Pareto Front in the
hypervolume metric [49]. The higher the hypervolume, the better the
population’s convergence and distribution. The algorithm proposed in
this article facilitates better decision in contexts where high marginal
rates of return are desirable, providing decision makers, with a high
concentration of solutions, in the knee regions of the Pareto front.

7
H.R.O. Rocha et al. Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145

Fig. 4. The Elitist Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II optimization procedure.

6.3. The modified NSGA-II optimization algorithm Table 3

Example of chromosome representation indicating the daily hours operation of the
equipment and the battery.
The NSGA-II proposed by Deb et al. at [50] is an elitist evo-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ⋯ 24
lutionary algorithm and it incorporates a mechanism that preserves
Eq.0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 ⋯ 0
the dominant solutions through the generations. However, to address
⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯ ⋯
the DSM problem formulated in this article, the traditional NSGA-II Eq. 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 ⋯ 0
procedure was profoundly modified according to the implementation Eq. Bat 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 ⋯ 1
of a heuristic for the generation of viable initial population, and to
adaptations in the crossover and the mutation genetic operators aiming
a matrix representation of a chromosome. Figs. 4 to 8 show details
of the modifications in a way that facilitates a comparison with the After completing the battery allocation, the algorithm verifies the
operations described in [50]. possibility of chromosomal differentiation by comparing chromossoma-
lDifferentiation to 𝛼. If 𝛼 is greater, all equipment will be reallocated
from the generated individual. For each use of reallocated equipment,
6.3.1. Initial population
the algorithm generates a new individual. In this way, it generates 𝑁
In this work, each chromosome in the population represents a
new individuals, with 𝑁 being the number of equipment. From these
residential electricity demand plan. A gene of this chromosome denote
𝑁 individuals, it chooses a set of 𝑝 individuals to compose the initial
an equipment in the residence and its architecture consists of a binary
population together with individual 𝑖, for 𝑝 less than or equal to 𝑁.
vector of twenty four positions. Each position portrays the hours of the
To do this, the algorithm follows the rule: 𝑖 + 𝑝 must be less than or
day, where 1 means that the equipment is operating at the respective
equal to the size of the population; if 𝛼 is less, only one individual is
time and 0 indicates that the equipment is off. The last binary vector
inserted into the population. This process is repeated until the number
of the chromosome illustrates the battery, where 1 indicates that it can of individuals in the population is equal to the predetermined number,
supply or receive electricity and 0 indicates that it will not be used returning to the complete initial population.
at the respective time. Table 3 illustrates a chromosome, where the
classification of the daily hours announces if the equipment and the 6.3.2. Ranking of solutions
battery are in operation or not. The ranking of all individuals, at non-dominance levels, designate
Fig. 5 presents the algorithm proposed to heuristically generates the way used to get the set of solutions that form the Pareto Front. It
the population. The container Equipment Use Allocation generates an should be reminded that the Pareto front represents the best compro-
individual 𝑖. For each device, the possibility of the device being turned mise between the objectives of the problem. For this, we compared each
off is verified by randomly determining deletionProcess. If its value individual with all others from the population in terms of objectives.
is less than or equal to 𝜂, the process will turn off the equipment. A solution 𝑥 is said to dominate 𝑦, if, and only if, for all objectives
Otherwise, it will randomly allocate the equipment usage, respecting involved in the function, 𝑥 it is not worse than 𝑦 in any objective, and
its operating cycle rules. For the battery, the procedure consists only of there is at least one objective in which 𝑥 is better than 𝑦. Fig. 6 shows
a random allocation of 0 or 1 for each of the 24 gene positions. the ranking algorithm used in this work.

8
H.R.O. Rocha et al.
Fig. 5. Flowchart of the algorithm proposed to generates the initial population of the modified NSGA-II.
6.3.3. Crossover description
After selecting the individuals, the population is effectively inserted
in the crossover process. Initially, it chooses two individuals as parents
and define the definitive occurrence of the crossover by comparing 𝛼
and crossoverProbability, defined in this work as 0.95 (95%).
If 𝛼 is greater, the crossover does not occurs and the process will
begin again with the choice of the next two individuals. Otherwise, the
crossover is obtained as: the algorithm determines the crossover point
randomly between 1 and 𝑁, where 𝑁 is the number of equipment;
it sections the two individuals chosen as parents from crossingPointing
until the last gene; then, each individual receives the sectioned section
of the other, generating two children individuals. The process restarts
and chooses the next two parent individuals until including the entire
selected population. Fig. 7 describes the entire crossover process.
6.3.4. Mutation description
For each individual in the population, the algorithm verifies the pos-
sibility of mutating by comparing 𝛼 to the mutate probability, defined
as 0.1 (10 %). If 𝛼 is greater, the mutation process does not occurs for
that individual. Otherwise, the mutation process arises as follows: if the
equipment is turned on, it should be turned off; otherwise, it is turned
on by randomly allocating its use, respecting the duty cycle restrictions.
Fig. 8 illustrated the proposed the mutation process.
7. Tests and results
The methodology proposed in this work was implemented in
Matlab® and the results presented in terms of energy cost, consumed
power and levels of comforts.
9
Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145
Table 4
Main parameters of the GERAR 246 model turbines.
Wind turbine parameters Values
Nominal power 1000 W
Cut-in speed 2 m/s
rated speed 12.5 m/s
Cut-out speed 38 m/s
Fig. 9 shows the tariff used to tax the daily energy consumed in an
SH. It is clear from Fig. 9 that in two periods, between 6 am to 9 am
and from 5 pm to 10 pm, the price of energy is more expensive.
As previously mentioned, the data we obtained from a meteoro-
logical station, to perform computational experiments with the SVR
algorithm, has 20,208 input patterns. The generated power was sim-
ulated considering a 𝜇DG with a total peak power of 8.0 kW, 3 kW
of wind generation and 5 kWp of photovoltaic generation. The wind
power has 3 Enersud turbines of the GERAR 246 model, with main
technical parameters provided by their datasheets summarized in Ta-
ble 4. The considered photovoltaic system has 11 modules of the model
CS1U-420MS with the technical specifications summarized in Table 5.
A shift of 24 h was applied in the total power values to form the
input and output data of the SVR, with data separated in 80% for
training and 20% for tests. The test set was used to measure the quality
of the predictions generated by the SVR algorithm. The application
of the SVR resulted in a mean square error (MSE) equals to 0.00536
and a root mean square error (RMSE) of 0.0732. Fig. 10 presents a
comparison between a daily demand provided by the mathematical
H.R.O. Rocha et al. Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145

Fig. 6. Algorithm used to ranking the non-dominance solutions.

Fig. 7. Flowchart of the proposed crossover algorithm used in the modified NSGA-II.

10
H.R.O. Rocha et al. Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145

Fig. 8. The proposed mutation algorithm used in the modified NSGA-II.

Fig. 9. Energy cost used by the electricity company to tax the daily energy consumed in an SH.

Table 5 predicted by the SVR. Fig. 10 shows that a small discrepancy between
Main parameters of the CS1U-420MS photovoltaic modules.
the curves is observed.
Photovoltaic module parameters Values
Fig. 11 shows a comparison between the comfort values of a Dryer
Nominal power 420 Wp obtained with the Kmeans algorithm, and the average annual power.
Open circuit voltage (𝑉𝑜𝑐 ) 53.8 V
Short circuit current (𝐼𝑠𝑐 ) 9.8 A
This result is part of the comfort matrix that represents, in a weighted
Voltage at maximum power (𝑉𝑚𝑝𝑝𝑡 ) 44.9 V way, how the extensions are used by a consumer during a day.
Current at maximum power (𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑝𝑡 ) 9.37 A Fig. 11 shows that the region of maximum comfort is between 10
Voltage temperature coefficient (𝐾𝑣 ) 0.29 V/◦ C am and 3 pm. In this period, the consumer usually uses the extensions
Current temperature coefficient (𝐾𝑖 ) 0.05 A/◦ C
Nominal cell operating temperature 43 ◦ C
of his residence. Average comfort comprises the interval between 9
am and 10 am, as well as between 3 pm and 6 pm, with values close
to maximum comfort. The Minimum comfort was registered between
6 pm and 8 am.
model, using the real meteorological data randomly selected, and that We performed tests with an SH of 16 branches, considering 1
equipment per branch, to evaluate the performance of the proposed

11
H.R.O. Rocha et al. Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145

Fig. 10. Comparisons between the demand provided by the mathematical model and that forecast by the proposed SVR algorithm.

Fig. 11. Comfort of a Dryer obtained with the K-means, and the average annual power.

Fig. 12. The Pareto front generated by the proposed NSGA-II optimization.

12
H.R.O. Rocha et al.
Fig. 13. Equipment operating hours provided by the NSGA-II, at maximum comfort.
Fig. 14. Optimized values of residence energy, battery energy, renewable energy, and energy demanded from the public grid, at the maximum cost plan.
optimization method. Table 6 shows the characteristics of each res-
idence’s equipment, in terms of average power, operating time in
minutes and the number of cycles of use of the equipment during 24 h.
The equipment with the lowest average power has 200 W and the SH
has an installed load of 26.886 kW. To promote the aforementioned
flexibility in the SH, we adopted an energy storage system with the
technical data specified in Table 7.
The parameters used in NSGA-II simulation are: heuristic initial-
ization of the population with 100 possible solutions, roulette selec-
tion, crossover at a rate equal to 0.95, mutation with rate equals to
0.1 and 500 generations. The result of the suggested multi-objective
optimization is a set of non-dominated solutions called Pareto Front.
Fig. 12 shows the Pareto curve obtained after the convergence of the
modified NSGA-II, resulting in 40 demand plans for a predetermined
maximum cost of R$15.00. The numerical results show that the demand
plans have a costs ranging from R$-8.38 to R$14.87. Negative cost
values indicate the sale of energy from SH to the public energy grid,
considering that the cost of sales is the same of the adopted in the
purchases.
13
Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145
We also highlighted the maximum, medium and lowest cost/
comfort plans, to demonstrate to the consumer that a readjustment in
the equipment’s use is influenced not only by the quantity of equipment
but also by the energy efficiency, time and moment of their use. Fig. 13
shows the operating hours of the equipment provided by the proposed
NSGA-II, considering maximum comfort depicted in Fig. 12. In this
demand plan, most of the equipment was switched on at the moments
of maximum user comfort. It can be observed from Fig. 13 that the
scheduling obtained by the meta-heuristic led to a cost of R$14.87 and
a comfort of 230 units.
Considering the maximum cost plan, Fig. 14 shows the optimized
values of the energy demanded in the residence, of the battery energy,
of the generated renewable energy, and the energy consumed from the
public grid. It can be observed from Fig. 14 that, at 10 am to 6 pm, the
surplus energy comes from the renewable energy system. At 12 pm, the
battery starts to charge until it reaches the maximum point at 4 pm.
Therefore, the battery can be used in the second schedule bridge, that
occurs from 5 pm to 10 pm. This leads to a less use of energy supplied
H.R.O. Rocha et al. Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145

Fig. 15. Overview of the medium cost plan provided by the NSGA-II optimization for values of residence energy, battery energy, renewable energy, and energy demanded from
the public grid.

Fig. 16. Equipment operating hours provided by the NSGA-II, at minimum comfort.

Table 6 Table 7
Characteristics of the equipment present in the SH. Energy storage system parameters.
Equipment 𝑃𝑁𝑜𝑚𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙 (W) Op. Time (min) Cycles Battery parameters Values
Electric shower 4500 10 3 Maximum energy (𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑚𝑎𝑥) 10,000 Wh
High pressure washer 2000 30 1 Minimum energy (𝐸𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑚𝑖𝑛) 2000 Wh
Electric fryer 1500 60 1 Maximum charge∖discharge power (Pbatmax) 8000 W
Water pump 736 80 1 Charge∖discharge efficiency (𝜂𝑏𝑐 ∖𝜂𝑏𝑑 ) 0.95%
Electric shower 4500 10 3 Self-discharge rate (𝜎) 0.01% per hour
Air conditioner 2200 240 2
Electric coffee maker 600 60 2
Washing machine 1550 120 1
Mini system 1800 30 2 by the public power grid. At almost any time of the day, it is necessary
Desktop computer 600 180 3
Induction cooker 3000 60 2 to buy energy from the public network, with the only exception being
Lamps 300 600 1 at hours 11, 18 and 19.
Refrigerator 400 1440 1
Electric car 1500 360 1 Table 8 shows the operating hours of the contemplated equipment,
Television 200 60 3
considering average comfort. In this demand plan, almost all equipment
Clothes iron 1500 30 1
works during peak hours or intermediate pricing. It is shown in Table 8
that some equipment were not used in the daily schedule optimization
process, due to its low priority over other equipment.

14
H.R.O. Rocha et al. Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145

Fig. 17. Residency energy, battery, 𝜇GD and public grid provided by the NSGA-II optimization at the minimum cost plan.

Fig. 18. Monetary consumption for maximum cost plan with and without 𝜇GD and battery.

Table 8 Fig. 15 shows an overview of the medium cost plan, with the
Operating hours of the equipment proposed by the NSGA-II, considering average curves of residence power demand, of the energy generated by the
comfort.
𝜇GD, of the battery energy and the energy consumed from the public
Equipment Time of use of appliances
grid, depicted in a single graphic to facilitate the analysis. It can be
Electric shower – observed from Fig. 15 that the peak of renewable energy is between
High pressure washer –
15 and 16 h. In hour 7, the battery started to discharge because of
Electric dryer –
Water pump 22:00–23:00 and 23:00–24:00 the first cost peak. At 11 am, it starts to charge so that at 20 pm
Electric shower 13:00–14:00, 20:00–21:00 and 21:00–22:00 it discharges again. It can also be seen that, when renewable energy
Air conditioner – increases, the battery starts to receive part of that energy. Furthermore,
Electric coffee maker 9:00–10:00, 13:00–14:00 and 19:00 – 20:00 Fig. 15 shows that, in this energy plan, the amount of energy sold to
Washing machine –
the network increases, leaving several pieces of equipment turned off
Mini system –
Desktop computer 13:00–16:00, 19:00–22:00 and 22:00–01:00 in the analyzed residence.
Induction cooktop – Fig. 16 shows the operating hours of the equipment provided by the
Lamps 20:00–06:00 modified NSGA-II, considering minimum comfort shown in Fig. 12. In
Refrigerator 01:00–24:00 this demand plan, no equipment works during the peak or intermediate
Electric car –
tariffs. The proposed methodology designated that only the water
Television –
Clothes iron 14:00–15:00 pump, the electric shower, the electric coffee maker, the television and
Cost [R$/day] −3,70 the iron have been connected, due to their higher priority. The curves
Comfort 91 depicted in Fig. 17, obtained at the minimum cost plan, show that the
residential energy demand is low and all renewable energy generated
from 9 am to 9 pm is sold to the public energy network. Besides, part
of that energy is used to charge the battery after 1 pm. At almost all
day, there are energy sales to the public network.

15
H.R.O. Rocha et al.
Finally, we analyze the cost behavior of the maximum cost plans
with and without 𝜇DG and battery. Fig. 18 shows that the cost dif-
ference at the end of the day is R$15.73, which corresponds to a
reduction of 51.4% in the energy cost. It should be stressed that,
analyzing such behavior, the optimization process provided a medium
and a minimum measurement plans with variations around R$11.87
and R$11.41, respectively.
8. Conclusion
The energy demand planning in Smart Homes was solved in this
work, with a new methodology proposed to deal with the tradeoff
energy cost versus user comfort. Combining three different Artificial
Intelligence techniques, the demand-side management problem was
formulated before the implementation of an optimization algorithm.
The proposed optimization methodology took into account a modified
version of the Elitist Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II to
manage the user energy demand considering a Smart Home scenario
with electricity price fluctuations over time, priority in the use of
equipment, operating cycles and a battery bank. Moreover, prior the
Elitist Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II modification, the
methodology employed the Support Vector Regression technique to
forecast the distributed generation, as well as the K-means clustering
method to determine the user comfort levels.
The efficiency of the proposed solution was demonstrated according
to a 51.4% cost reduction, when Smart Homes with and without
distributed generation and battery bank are compared. The proposal
generate benefits to the consumer, who will pay less for the consumed
energy. At the same time, it will benefit the electricity distribution
company, since, with such readjustments, there will be a smoothing
in the load curve and reduction in the maximum demand.
Finally, it should be stressed that the methodology proposed in this
paper is universal, which means that it can be applied by any residential
consumer around the world. Beyond adaptations to local tariff models,
its application requires the measurements of a local weather station, as
well as the consumption history of the Smart Home.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Helder R.O. Rocha: Conception and design, or analysis and in-
terpretation of the data, Drafting the article or revising it critically
for important intellectual content, Approval of the final version. Icaro
H. Honorato: Conception and design, or analysis and interpretation
of the data, Drafting the article or revising it critically for important
intellectual content, Approval of the final version. Rodrigo Fiorotti:
Conception and design, or analysis and interpretation of the data,
Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual
content, Approval of the final version. Wanderley C. Celeste: Concep-
tion and design, or analysis and interpretation of the data, Drafting
the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content,
Approval of the final version. Leonardo J. Silvestre: Conception and
design, or analysis and interpretation of the data, Drafting the article or
revising it critically for important intellectual content, Approval of the
final version. Jair A.L. Silva: Conception and design, or analysis and
interpretation of the data, Drafting the article or revising it critically
for important intellectual content, Approval of the final version.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgment
The authors acknowledge the support from the FAPES, Brazil 538/2018,
601/2018 and CNPq, Brazil 309823/2018-8 projects and NiDA, Brazil.
16
Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145
References
[1] Ackermann Th, Andersson G, Soder L. Distributed generation: a definition. Electr
Power Syst Res 2001;57(3):195–204.
[2] Lasseter RH. Microgrids. In: 2002 IEEE power engineering society winter
meeting. Conference proceedings (Cat. No. 02CH37309). 2002, p. 305–8.
[3] Farhangi H. The path of the smart grid. IEEE Power Energy Mag
2009;8(1):18–28.
[4] Flores JT, Celeste WC, Coura DJC, Rissino SdD, Rocha HRO, et al. Demand
planning in smart homes. IEEE Lat Am Trans 2016;14(7):3247–55.
[5] Barbato A, Capone A. Optimization models and methods for demand-side
management of residential users: A survey. Energies 2014;7:5787–824. http:
//dx.doi.org/10.3390/en7095787.
[6] Gelazanskas L, Gamage KAA. Demand side management in smart grid: A review
and proposals for future direction. Sustainable Cities Soc 2014;11:22–30.
[7] Hong SH, Yu M, Huang X. A real-time demand response algorithm for
heterogeneous devices in buildings and homes. Energy 2015;80:123–32.
[8] Ma K, Yao T, Yang J, Guan X. Residential power scheduling for demand response
in smart grid. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2016;78:320–5.
[9] Moon S, Lee JW. Multi-residential demand response scheduling with multi-class
appliances in smart grid. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2016;9(4):2518–28.
[10] Rasheed MB, Javaid N, Ahmad A, Awais M, Khan ZA, Qasim U, et al. Priority
and delay constrained demand side management in real-time price environment
with renewable energy source. Int J Energy Res 2016;40(14):2002–21.
[11] Marzband M, Yousefnejad E, Sumper A, Domínguez-García JL. Real time exper-
imental implementation of optimum energy management system in standalone
microgrid by using multi-layer ant colony optimization. Int J Electr Power Energy
Syst 2016;75:265–74.
[12] Li T, Dong M. Real-time residential-side joint energy storage management
and load scheduling with renewable integration. IEEE Trans Smart Grid
2016;9(1):283–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2016.2550500.
[13] Rahim S, Javaid N, Ahmad A, Khan SA, Khan ZA, Alrajeh N, et al. Exploiting
heuristic algorithms to efficiently utilize energy management controllers with
renewable energy sources. Energy Build 2016;129:452–70.
[14] Javaid N, Hussain SM, Ullah I, Noor MA, Abdul W, Almogren A, et al. Demand
side management in nearly zero energy buildings using heuristic optimizations.
Energies 2017;10(8):1131.
[15] Ahmad A, Khan A, Javaid N, Hussain HM, Abdul W, Almogren A, et al. An
optimized home energy management system with integrated renewable energy
and storage resources. Energies 2017;10(4):549.
[16] Nadeem Z, Javaid N, Malik AW, Iqbal S. Scheduling appliances with GA, TLBO,
FA, OSR and their hybrids using chance constrained optimization for smart
homes. Energies 2018;11(4):888.
[17] Hussain HM, Javaid N, Iqbal S, Hasan QU, Aurangzeb K, Alhussein M. An
efficient demand side management system with a new optimized home energy
management controller in smart grid. Energies 2018;11(1):190.
[18] Khalid A, Javaid N, Guizani M, Alhussein M, Aurangzeb K, Ilahi M. Towards
dynamic coordination among home appliances using multi-objective energy
optimization for demand side management in smart buildings. IEEE Access
2018;6:19509–29.
[19] Rahim MH, Khalid A, Javaid N, Alhussein M, Aurangzeb K, Khan ZA. Energy
efficient smart buildings using coordination among appliances generating large
data. IEEE Access 2018;6:34670–90.
[20] O’Dwyer E, Pan I, Acha S, Shah N. Smart energy systems for sustainable
smart cities: Current developments, trends and future directions. Appl Energy
2019;237:581–97.
[21] Ullah I, Hussain S. Time-constrained Nature-Inspired Optimization Algorithms
for an efficient energy management system in smart homes and buildings. Appl
Sci 2019;9(4):792.
[22] Makhadmeh SN, Khader AT, Al-Betar MA, Naim S, Abasi AK, Alyasseri ZAA.
Optimization methods for power scheduling problems in smart home: Survey.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2019;115:109362.
[23] de Christo TM, Perron S, Fardin JF, Simonetti DSL, de Alvarez CE. Demand-
side energy management by cooperative combination of plans: A multi-objective
method applicable to isolated communities. Appl Energy 2019;240:453–72.
[24] Rasheed MB, Javaid N, Malik MSA, Asif M, Hanif MK, Chaudary MH. Intelligent
multi-agent based multilayered control system for opportunistic load scheduling
in smart buildings. IEEE Access 2019;7:23990–4006.
[25] Tom RJ, Sankaranarayanan S, Rodrigues JJPC. Smart energy management and
demand reduction by consumers and utilities in an IoT-Fog based power
distribution system. IEEE Internet Things J 2019;6(5):7386–94. http://dx.doi.
org/10.1109/JIOT.2019.2894326.
[26] Arabul FK, Arabul AY, Kumru CF, Boynuegri AR. Providing energy management
of a fuel cell–battery–wind turbine–solar panel hybrid off grid smart home
system. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2017;42(43):26906–13.
[27] Killian M, Zauner M, Kozek M. Comprehensive smart home energy man-
agement system using mixed-integer quadratic-programming. Appl Energy
2018;222:662–72.
[28] Khalid R, Javaid N, Rahim MH, Aslam S, Sher A. Fuzzy energy manage-
ment controller and scheduler for smart homes. Sustain Comput: Inform Syst
2019;21:103–18.
H.R.O. Rocha et al.
[29] Goncalves I, Gomes A, Antunes CH. Optimizing the management of smart
home energy resources under different power cost scenarios. Appl Energy
2019;242:351–63.
[30] Sharifi AH, Maghouli P. Energy management of smart homes equipped with
energy storage systems considering the PAR index based on real-time pricing.
Sustain Cities Soc 2019;45:579–87.
[31] Luo F, Kong W, Ranzi G, Dong ZY. Optimal home energy management system
with demand charge tariff and appliance operational dependencies. IEEE Trans
Smart Grid 2019;11(1):4–14.
[32] de Souza Dutra MD, da Conceição Júnior G, de Paula Ferreira W, Chaves MRC.
A customized transition towards smart homes: A fast framework for economic
analyses. Appl Energy 2020;262:114549.
[33] E Silva DP, Salles JLF, Fardin JF, Pereira MMR. Management of an island and
grid-connected microgrid using hybrid economic model predictive control with
weather data. Appl Energy 2020;278:115581.
[34] Romero-Quete D, Garcia JR. An affine arithmetic-model predictive control
approach for optimal economic dispatch of combined heat and power microgrids.
Appl Energy 2019;242:1436–47.
[35] Hossain MA, Pota HR, Hossain MJ, Blaabjerg F. Evolution of microgrids with
converter-interfaced generations: Challenges and opportunities. Int J Electr Power
Energy Syst 2019;109:160–86.
[36] Rocha HRO, Silvestre LJ, Celeste WC, Coura DJC, Junior LOR. Forecast of dis-
tributed electrical generation system capacity based on seasonal micro generators
using elm and pso. IEEE Lat Am Trans 2018;16(4):1136–41.
[37] Thapar V, Agnihotri G, Sethi VK. Critical analysis of methods for mathematical
modelling of wind turbines. Renew Energy 2011;36(11):3166–77.
[38] Carrillo C, Montaño AO, Cidrás J, Díaz-Dorado E. Review of power curve
modelling for wind turbines. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;21:572–81.
[39] Abdelaziz AY, Hegazy YG, El-Khattam W, Othman MM. Optimal allocation
of stochastically dependent renewable energy based distributed generators in
unbalanced distribution networks. Electr Power Syst Res 2015;119:34–44.
17
Applied Energy 282 (2021) 116145
[40] Schölkopf B, Bartlett P, Smola A, Williamson R. Support vector regression with
automatic accuracy control. In: International conference on artificial neural
networks. London: Springer; 1998, p. 111–6.
[41] Cortes C, Vapnik V. Support-vector networks. Mach Learn 1995;20(3):273–97.
[42] Coello CAC. Evolutionary multi-objective optimization: some current research
trends and topics that remain to be explored. Front Comput Sci China
2009;3(1):18–30.
[43] Mbhamidi L, Sivasubramani S. Optimal planning and operational strategy
of a residential microgrid with demand side management. IEEE Syst J
2019;14(2):2624–32.
[44] Khan ZA, Khalid A, Javaid N, Haseeb A, Saba T, Shafiq M. Exploiting
nature-inspired-based artificial intelligence techniques for coordinated day-
ahead scheduling to efficiently manage energy in smart grid. IEEE Access
2019;7:140102–25.
[45] Chiu WY, Hsieh JT, Chen CM. Pareto optimal demand response based on energy
costs and load factor in smart grid. IEEE Trans Ind Inf 2019;16(3):1811–22.
[46] Chang HH, Chiu WY, Sun H, Chen CM. User-centric multiobjective approach to
privacy preservation and energy cost minimization in smart home. IEEE Syst J
2018;13(1):1030–41.
[47] Rachmawati L, Srinivasan D. A multi-objective genetic algorithm with control-
lable convergence on knee regions. In: 2006 IEEE international conference on
evolutionary computation. 2006, p. 1916–23.
[48] Chiu WY, Yen GG, Juan TK. Minimum Manhattan distance approach to multiple
criteria decision making in multiobjective optimization problems. IEEE Trans
Evol Comput 2016;20(6):972–85.
[49] Zou J, Li Q, Yang S, Bai H, Zheng J. A prediction strategy based on center
points and knee points for evolutionary dynamic multi-objective optimization.
Appl Soft Comput 2017;61:806–18.
[50] Deb K, Agrawal S, Pratap A, Meyarivan T. A fast elitist non-dominated sorting
genetic algorithm for multi-objective optimization: NSGA-II. In: International
conference on parallel problem solving from nature. 2000, p. 849–58.