# Multi-objective thermal power load dispatch using chaotic differential evolutionary algorithm and Powell’s method

## Abstract

In this work, a chaotic differential evolutionary and Powell’s pattern search (CDEPS) algorithm is proposed to solve multi-objective thermal power load dispatch (MTPLD) problem. The chaotic differential evolutionary method is responsible for the diversification, and Powell’s pattern search is dedicated to exploitation. Further, the performance of two CDEPS variants based on Gauss map and Tent map is investigated. The proposed MTPLD solution procedure either identifies a solution close to Pareto front or diversifies the existing Pareto frontier and finally selects a suitable compromising solution among the available options. In order to select the best compromising solution, a combination of surrogate worth trade-off approach and fuzzy theory is proposed as choice of objectives is ambiguous. The uniformity of Pareto front is evaluated by exploiting a quality measure approach. The performance analysis is done using generalized benchmark test functions and complex MTPLD problems. The ability of CDEPS to diversify Pareto front is verified by uniformity analysis of Pareto front. The one-sample Wilcoxon’s test and two-sample Mann Whitney’s test are used to analyze the experimental results. The exhaustive analysis shows that the Tent map-based CDEPS has better ability to generate quality generation schedule with uniform Pareto front quality and faster convergence rate.

### Keywords

Chaotic differential evolutionary algorithm Powell’s pattern search Surrogate worth trade-off method Multi-objective optimization Thermal power load dispatch## Notes

### Compliance with ethical standards

### Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

### Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

### References

- Abbass HA, Sarker R, Newton C (2001) PDE: a pareto-frontier differential evolution approach for multi-objective optimization problems. In: Proceedings of the congress on evolutionary Computation, vol. 2, pp. 971–978Google Scholar
- Abido M (2003a) Environmental/economic power dispatch using multiobjective evolutionary algorithms. IEEE Trans Power Syst 18(4):1529–1537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Abido M (2003b) A novel multiobjective evolutionary algorithm for environmental/economic power dispatch. Elect Power Syst Res 65(1):71–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Abido M (2009) Multiobjective particle swarm optimization for environmental/economic dispatch problem. Elect Power Syst Res 79(7):1105–1113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Adeyemo J, Otieno F (2009) Multi-objective differential evolution algorithm for solving engineering problems. Int J Appl Sci 9(20):3652–3661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Ali M, Siarry P, Pant M (2012) An efficient differential evolution based algorithm for solving multi-objective optimization problems. Eur J Oper Res 217(2):404–416MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
- Barisal A (2013) Dynamic search space squeezing strategy based intelligent algorithm solutions to economic dispatch with multiple fuels. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 45(1):50–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Basu M (2011) Economic environmental dispatch using multi-objective differential evolution. Appl Soft Comput 11(2):2845–2853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bhattacharjee K, Bhattacharya A, Dey SH (2014) Solution of economic emission load dispatch problems of power systems by real coded chemical reaction algorithm. Int J Elect Power Energy Syst 59:176–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bhattacharya A, Chattopadhyay PK (2010) Hybrid differential evolution with biogeography-based optimization for solution of economic load dispatch. IEEE Trans Power Syst 25(4):1955–1964CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cai J, Ma X, Li Q, Li L, Peng H (2009) A multi-objective chaotic particle swarm optimization for environmental/economic dispatch. Energy Convers Manage 50(5):1318–1325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Cai J, Ma X, Li Q, Li L, Peng H (2010) A multi-objective chaotic ant swarm optimization for environmental/economic dispatch. Int J Elect Power Energy Syst 32(5):337–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Chatterjee A, Ghoshal S, Mukherjee V (2012) Solution of combined economic and emission dispatch problems of power systems by an opposition-based harmony search algorithm. Electr Power Energy Syst 39(1):9–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Chiang C-L (2005) Improved genetic algorithm for power economic dispatch of units with valve-point effects and multiple fuels. IEEE Trans Power Syst 20(4):1690–1699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Deb K (2012) Optimization for engineering design: algorithms and examples. PHI Learning Pvt Ltd, Delhi, IndiaGoogle Scholar
- Dhillon J, Kothari D (2000) The surrogate worth trade-off approach for multiobjective thermal power dispatch problem. Elect Power Syst Res 56(2):103–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Dieu VN, Schegner P (2013) Augmented lagrange hopfield network initialized by quadratic programming for economic dispatch with piecewise quadratic cost functions and prohibited zones. Appl Soft Comput 13(1):292–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- dos Santos Coelho L, Sauer JG, Rudek M (2009) Differential evolution optimization combined with chaotic sequences for image contrast enhancement. Chaos Solitons Fractals 42(1):522–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Fan J-Y, Zhang L (1998) Real-time economic dispatch with line flow and emission constraints using quadratic programming. IEEE Trans Power Syst 13(2):320–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Güvenç U, Sönmez Y, Duman S, Yörükeren N (2012) Combined economic and emission dispatch solution using gravitational search algorithm. Scientia Iranica 19(6):1754–1762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Haghrah A, Mohammadi-ivatloo B, Seyedmonir S (2014) Real coded genetic algorithm approach with random transfer vectors-based mutation for short-term hydro-thermal scheduling. IET Gen Transm Distrib 9(1):75–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- He D, Dong G, Wang F, Mao Z (2011) Optimization of dynamic economic dispatch with valve-point effect using chaotic sequence based differential evolution algorithms. Energy Convers. Manage. 52(2):1026–1032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Huang VL, Zhao SZ, Mallipeddi R, Suganthan PN (2009) Multi-objective optimization using self-adaptive differential evolution algorithm. In: IEEE congress on evolutionary computation, pp. 190–194Google Scholar
- Iwasawa A, Kohtake N, Minato N, Crossley W (2014) Investigating the surrogate worth trade-off method to facilitate technology selection for new systems. In: Infranomics, Springer, pp. 339–349Google Scholar
- Jabr RA, Coonick AH, Cory BJ (2000) A homogeneous linear programming algorithm for the security constrained economic dispatch problem. IEEE Trans Power Syst 15(3):930–936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Jadoun VK, Gupta N, Niazi K, Swarnkar A (2015) Modulated particle swarm optimization for economic emission dispatch. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 73:80–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Jamil M, Yang X-S (2013) A literature survey of benchmark functions for global optimisation problems. Int J Math Model Numer Optim 4(2):150–194MATHGoogle Scholar
- Javidy B, Hatamlou A, Mirjalili S (2015) Ions motion algorithm for solving optimization problems. Appl Soft Comput 32:72–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Jeyadevi S, Baskar S, Babulal C, Iruthayarajan MW (2011) Solving multiobjective optimal reactive power dispatch using modified nsga-ii. Elect Power Energy Syst 33(2):219–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- King RTA, Rughooputh HC, Deb K (2005). Evolutionary multi-objective environmental/economic dispatch: Stochastic versus deterministic approaches. In: International conference on evolutionary multi-criterion optimization, Springer, pp. 677–691Google Scholar
- Kumar R, Sadu A, Kumar R, Panda S (2012) A novel multi-objective directed bee colony optimization algorithm for multi-objective emission constrained economic power dispatch. Electr Power Energy Syst 43(1):1241–1250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Leung Y-W, Wang Y (2003) U-measure: a quality measure for multiobjective programming. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part A Syst Hum 33(3):337–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lu Y, Zhou J, Qin H, Wang Y, Zhang Y (2011a) Chaotic differential evolution methods for dynamic economic dispatch with valve-point effects. Eng Appl Artif Intell 24(2):378–387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lu Y, Zhou J, Qin H, Wang Y, Zhang Y (2011b) A hybrid multi-objective cultural algorithm for short-term environmental/economic hydrothermal scheduling. Energy Convers Manage 52(5):2121–2134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Mahfoud SW (1995) Niching methods for genetic algorithms. Urbana 51(95001):62–94Google Scholar
- Mandal B, Roy PK, Mandal S (2014) Economic load dispatch using krill herd algorithm. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 57:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Moradi-Dalvand M, Mohammadi-Ivatloo B, Najafi A, Rabiee A (2012) Continuous quick group search optimizer for solving non-convex economic dispatch problems. Electr Power Syst Res 93:93–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Murugan P, Kannan S, Baskar S (2009) Application of nsga-ii algorithm to single-objective transmission constrained generation expansion planning. IEEE Trans Power Syst 24(4):1790–1797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Pandit N, Tripathi A, Tapaswi S, Pandit M (2012) An improved bacterial foraging algorithm for combined static/dynamic environmental economic dispatch. Appl Soft Comput 12(11):3500–3513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Park J-B, Jeong Y-W, Shin J-R, Lee KY (2010) An improved particle swarm optimization for nonconvex economic dispatch problems. IEEE Trans Power Syst 25(1):156–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Robič T, Filipič B (2005) Demo: differential evolution for multiobjective optimization. In: International conference on evolutionary multi-criterion optimization, Springer, pp. 520–533Google Scholar
- Roy PK, Bhui S (2013) Multi-objective quasi-oppositional teaching learning based optimization for economic emission load dispatch problem. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 53:937–948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sayah S, Hamouda A (2013) A hybrid differential evolution algorithm based on particle swarm optimization for nonconvex economic dispatch problems. Appl Soft Comput 13(4):1608–1619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Secui DC (2015) A new modified artificial bee colony algorithm for the economic dispatch problem. Energy Convers Manage 89:43–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Shaw B, Mukherjee V, Ghoshal S (2012) Solution of economic dispatch problems by seeker optimization algorithm. Expert Syst Appl 39(1):508–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Singh M, Dhillon J (2016) Multiobjective thermal power dispatch using opposition-based greedy heuristic search. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 82:339–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Singh NJ, Dhillon J, Kothari D (2016) Synergic predator-prey optimization for economic thermal power dispatch problem. Appl Soft Comput 43:298–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Sivasubramani S, Swarup K (2011) Environmental/economic dispatch using multi-objective harmony search algorithm. Electr Power Syst Res 81(9):1778–1785CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Storn R, Price K (1995) Differential evolution-a simple and efficient adaptive scheme for global optimization over continuous spaces. International computer science institute, berkeley. Technical report, CA, 1995, Tech. Rep. TR-95–012Google Scholar
- Talaq J, El-Hawary F, El-Hawary M (1994) A summary of environmental/economic dispatch algorithms. IEEE Trans Power Syst 9(3):1508–1516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Thangaraj R, Pant M, Chelliah TR, Abraham A (2012) Opposition based chaotic differential evolution algorithm for solving global optimization problems. In: Fourth world congress on nature and biologically inspired computing, pp. 1–7Google Scholar
- Xu B, Zhong P-A, Zhao Y-F, Zhu Y-Z, Zhang G-Q (2014) Comparison between dynamic programming and genetic algorithm for hydro unit economic load dispatch. Water Sci Eng 7(4):420–432Google Scholar
- Xue F, Sanderson AC, Graves RJ (2003) Pareto-based multi-objective differential evolution. In: Proceedings of the 2003 congress on evolutionary computation (CEC’03), vol 2. IEEE, pp 862–869Google Scholar
- Zitzler E, Thiele L (1999) Multiobjective evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study and the strength pareto approach. IEEE Trans Evolut Comput 3(4):257–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar