Advertisement

A two-layer algorithm based on PSO for solving unit commitment problem

  • Yu Zhai
  • Xiaofeng LiaoEmail author
  • Nankun Mu
  • Junqing Le
Methodologies and Application
  • 24 Downloads

Abstract

It is well known that electric generators consume huge amounts of energy every year. Nowadays, research for the unit commitment problem (UCP) has become a very important task in a power plant. However, the existing optimal methods for solving UCP are very easy to fall into local optimum, resulting in poor performance. Moreover, as no separate layering of economic load distribution, the existing algorithms are very inefficient. Toward this end, a new algorithm named improved simulated annealing particle swarm optimization (ISAPSO) is proposed in this paper. The proposed algorithm consists of a two-layer structure which is designed to simplify the complex problem of UCP. Specifically, in the upper layer, the algorithm based on elitist strategy PSO and SA is much easier to jump out of the local optimum when solving UCP and thus gets a better solution. In the lower layer, convex optimization approach is used to improve the search efficiency of ISAPSO. Furthermore, several methods are also designed to solve the problem-related constraints, which can save a lot of computing resources. Finally, the experimental results show that the cost performance of ISAPSO is better than that of the existing algorithms.

Keywords

Unit commitment problem Economic load distribution Particle swarm optimization Simulated annealing algorithm 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is supported in part by National Key Research and Development Program of China (Grant no. 2018AAA0100101), in part by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant no. 61932006, 61772434, 61403121, 61806169), in part by China Postdoctoral Science Foundation under Grant 2018M643085, and in part by Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (Grant no. XDJK2018D005, XDJK2019C020).

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 or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. Balasubramanian KP, Santhi RK (2016) Best compromised schedule for multi-objective unit commitment problems. Indian J Sci Technol 9(2).  https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i2/80998
  2. Baldwin CJ, Dale KM, Dittrich RF (1959) A study of the economic shutdown of generating units in daily dispatch. Trans Am Inst Electr Eng Part III: Power Appar Syst 78(4):1272–1282.  https://doi.org/10.1109/AIEEPAS.1959.4500539 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chakraborty S, Ito T, Senjyu T, Saber AY (2012) Unit commitment strategy of thermal generators by using advanced fuzzy controlled binary particle swarm optimization algorithm. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 43(1):1072–1080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chandram K, Subrahmanyam N, Sydulu M (2011) Unit commitment by improved pre-prepared power demand table and muller method. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 33(1):106–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chandrasekaran K, Simon SP (2012) Network and reliability constrained unit commitment problem using binary real coded firefly algorithm. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 43(1):921–932CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cheng R, Jin Y (2015) A social learning particle swarm optimization algorithm for scalable optimization. Inf Sci 291(6):43–60MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cheng CP, Liu CW, Liu CC (2000) Unit commitment by lagrangian relaxation and genetic algorithms. IEEE Trans Power Syst 15(2):707–714CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cheng CP, Liu CW, Liu CC (2002) Unit commitment by annealing–genetic algorithm. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 24(2):149–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chung CY, Yu H, Wong KP (2011) An advanced quantum-inspired evolutionary algorithm for unit commitment. IEEE Trans Power Syst 26(2):847–854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chusanapiputt S, Nualhong D, Jantarang S, Phoomvuthisarn S (2009) A solution to unit commitment problem using hybrid ant system/priority list method. In: IEEE international power and energy conference, 2008. Pecon 2008, pp 1183–1188Google Scholar
  11. Damousis IG, Bakirtzis AG, Dokopoulos PS (2004) A solution to the unit-commitment problem using integer-coded genetic algorithm. IEEE Trans Power Syst 19(2):1165–1172.  https://doi.org/10.1109/TPWRS.2003.821625 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dhaliwal JS, Dhillon JS (2018) Modified binary differential evolution algorithm to solve unit commitment problem. Electr Power Compon Syst 46(8):900–918.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15325008.2018.1510445 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eldin AS, El-Sayed MAH, Youssef HKM (2008) A two-stage genetic based technique for the unit commitment optimization problem. In: International middle-east power system conference, 2008. Mepcon 2008, pp 425–430Google Scholar
  14. Franz A, Rieck J, Zimmermann J (2018) Fix-and-optimize procedures for solving the long-term unit commitment problem with pumped storages. Ann Oper Res 1:1–25Google Scholar
  15. Ghasemi M, Akbari E, Rahimnejad A, Razavi SE, Ghavidel S, Li L (2018) Phasor particle swarm optimization: a simple and efficient variant of PSO. Soft Comput.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-3536-8
  16. Jeong YW, Lee WN, Kim HH, Park JB, Shin JR (2009) Thermal unit commitment using binary differential evolution. J Electr Eng Technol 4(3):323–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jeong YW, Park JB, Jang SH, Lee KY (2010) A new quantum-inspired binary PSO: application to unit commitment problems for power systems. IEEE Trans Power Syst 25(3):1486–1495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Juste KA, Kita H, Tanaka E, Hasegawa J (1999) An evolutionary programming solution to the unit commitment problem. IEEE Trans Power Syst 14(4):1452–1459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kamboj VK, Bath SK, Dhillon JS (2017) A novel hybrid de-random search approach for unit commitment problem. Neural Comput Appl 28(7):1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kazarlis SA, Bakirtzis AG, Petridis V (1996) A genetic algorithm solution to the unit commitment problem. IEEE Trans Power Syst 11(1):83–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kennedy J, Eberhart R (1995) Particle swarm optimization. In: IEEE international conference on neural networks, 1995. Proceedings, vol 4, pp 1942–1948Google Scholar
  22. Kennedy J, Eberhart RC (2002) A discrete binary version of the particle swarm algorithm. In: IEEE international conference on systems, man, and cybernetics, 1997. Computational cybernetics and simulation, vol 5, pp 4104–4108Google Scholar
  23. Khanmohammadi S, Amiri M, Haque MT (2010) A new three-stage method for solving unit commitment problem. Energy 35(7):3072–3080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kumar V, Kumar D (2018) Binary whale optimization algorithm and its application to unit commitment problem. Neural Comput Appl.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-018-3796-3
  25. Lee S, Park H, Jeon M (2007) Binary particle swarm optimization with bit change mutation. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Li J, Zhang JQ, Jiang CJ, Zhou MC (2017) Composite particle swarm optimizer with historical memory for function optimization. IEEE Trans Cybern 45(10):2350–2363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ling Y, Li H, Cao B (2016) Cooperative co-evolution with graph-based differential grouping for large scale global optimization. In: International conference on natural computation, fuzzy systems and knowledge discovery, pp 95–102Google Scholar
  28. Liu Y, Yao X, Zhao Q, Higuchi T (2001) Scaling up fast evolutionary programming with cooperative coevolution. In: Proceedings of the 2001 congress on evolutionary computation, 2001. vol 2, pp 1101–1108Google Scholar
  29. Mahdavi S, Shiri ME, Rahnamayan S (2015) Metaheuristics in large-scale global continues optimization: a survey. Inf Sci 295:407–428MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Maifeld TT, Sheble GB (1996) Genetic-based unit commitment algorithm. IEEE Trans Power Syst 11(3):1359–1370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Niknam T, Narimani MR, Jabbari M (2013) Dynamic optimal power flow using hybrid particle swarm optimization and simulated annealing. Int Trans Electr Energy Syst 23(7):975–1001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ongsakul W, Petcharaks N (2004) Unit commitment by enhanced adaptive lagrangian relaxation. IEEE Trans Power Syst 19(1):620–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Ouyang Z, Shahidehpour SM (1991) An intelligent dynamic programming for unit commitment application. IEEE Trans Power Syst 6(3):1203–1209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pang CK, Sheble GB, Albuyeh F (1981) Evaluation of dynamic programming based methods and multiple area representation for thermal unit commitments. IEEE Trans Power Syst PAS 100(3):1212–1218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Panwar LK, Reddy S, Kumar R (2015) Binary fireworks algorithm based thermal unit commitment. Int J Swarm Intell Res (IJSIR) 6(2):87–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Panwar LK, Reddy S, Verma A, Panigrahi BK, Kumar R (2018) Binary grey wolf optimizer for large scale unit commitment problem. Swarm Evolut Comput 38:251–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Qin Q, Cheng S, Zhang Q, Li L, Shi Y (2016) Particle swarm optimization with interswarm interactive learning strategy. IEEE Trans Cybern 46(10):2238–2251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Reddy KS, Panwar LK, Kumar R, Panigrahi BK (2016) Binary fireworks algorithm for profit based unit commitment (PBUC) problem. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 83:270–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Roy PK (2013) Solution of unit commitment problem using gravitational search algorithm. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 53(4):85–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Saber NA, Salimi M, Mirabbasi D (2016) A priority list based approach for solving thermal unit commitment problem with novel hybrid genetic-imperialist competitive algorithm. Energy 117:272–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Séguin S, Côté P, Audet C (2016) Self-scheduling short-term unit commitment and loading problem. IEEE Trans Power Syst 31(1):133–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Senjyu T, Yamashiro H, Uezato K, Funabashi T (2002) A unit commitment problem by using genetic algorithm based on unit characteristic classification. In: Power engineering society winter meeting, vol 1, pp 58–63Google Scholar
  43. Shoults RR, Chang SK, Helmick S, Grady WM (2007) A practical approach to unit commitment, economic dispatch and savings allocation for multiple-area pool operation with import/export constraints. IEEE Trans Power Appar Syst PAS 99(2):625–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Simopoulos DN, Kavatza SD, Vournas CD (2006) Unit commitment by an enhanced simulated annealing algorithm. IEEE Trans Power Syst 21(1):68–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Srikanth RK, Panwar LK, Panigrahi BK, Kumar R (2017) Solution to unit commitment in power system operation planning using binary coded modified moth flame optimization algorithm (bmmfoa): A flame selection based computational technique. J Comput Sci 25:298–317 MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  46. Sriyanyong P, Song YH (2005) Unit commitment using particle swarm optimization combined with lagrange relaxation. In: Power engineering society general meeting, vol 3, pp 2752–2759Google Scholar
  47. Sudibyo S, Murat MN, Aziz N (2015) Simulated annealing-particle swarm optimization (SA-PSO): particle distribution study and application in neural wiener-based NMPC. In: Control conferenceGoogle Scholar
  48. Tsalavoutis VA, Vrionis CG, Tolis AI (2018) Optimizing a unit commitment problem using an evolutionary algorithm and a plurality of priority lists. Oper Res 2:1–54Google Scholar
  49. Valenzuela J, Smith AE (2002) A seeded memetic algorithm for large unit commitment problems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  50. Wang Z, Yu YX, Zhang HP (2004) Social evolutionary programming based unit commitment. Proc CSEE 04:16–21Google Scholar
  51. Wang B, Li Y, Watada J (2011) Re-scheduling the unit commitment problem in fuzzy environment. In: IEEE international conference on fuzzy systems, pp 1090–1095Google Scholar
  52. Wood AJ (1996) Power generation operation and control. Fuel Energy Abstr 37(3):90–93MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Xiang Y, Zhang X (2014) Unit commitment using lagrangian relaxation and particle swarm optimization. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 61:510–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Yang T, Ting TO (2008) Methodological priority list for unit commitment problem. In: International conference on computer science and software engineering, pp 176–179Google Scholar
  55. Yang Q, Chen WN, Gu T, Zhang H, Deng JD, Li Y, Zhang J (2016) Segment-based predominant learning swarm optimizer for large-scale optimization. IEEE Trans Cybern 47(9):2896–2910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Yang Q, Chen WN, Deng JD, Li Y, Gu T, Zhang J (2018) A level-based learning swarm optimizer for large-scale optimization. IEEE Trans Evolut Comput 22(4):578–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zhang J, Tang Q, Chen Y, Lin S (2016) A hybrid particle swarm optimization with small population size to solve the optimal short-term hydro-thermal unit commitment problem. Energy 109:765–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Zuo X, Xiao L (2014) A DE and PSO based hybrid algorithm for dynamic optimization problems. Soft Comput 18(7):1405–1424CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chongqing Key Laboratory of Nonlinear Circuits and Intelligent Information Processing, College of Electronic and Information EngineeringSouthwest UniversityChongqingPeople’s Republic of China
  2. 2.Key Laboratory of Dependable Service Computing in Cyber Physical Society-Ministry of Education, College of Computer ScienceChongqing UniversityChongqingPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations