Operation and Planning of Distribution

Networks with Integration of Renewable

Distributed Generators Considering
Uncertainties: A Review
Rana. H. A. Zubo1, Geev Mokryani1, Haile-Selassie Rajamani1, Jamshid Aghaei2, Taher Niknam2, and Prashant
Pillai1
1. School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, University of Bradford, Bradford BD7 1DP,
UK
2. Department of Electrical And Electronics Engineering, Shiraz University of Technology, Shiraz, Iran

Emails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

[email protected], [email protected]

Abstract
Distributed generators (DGs) are a reliable solution to supply economic and reliable electricity to customers. It
is the last stage in delivery of electric power which can be defined as an electric power source connected directly
to the distribution network or on the customer site. It is necessary to allocate DGs optimally (size, placement
and the type) to obtain commercial, technical, environmental and regulatory advantages of power systems. In
this context, a comprehensive literature review of uncertainty modeling methods used for modelling uncertain
parameters related to renewable DGs as well as methodologies used for the planning and operation of DGs
integration into distribution network.
The authors strongly recommend this review to researchers, scientists and engineers who are working in this
field of research work.

Keywords: Distributed generation; Distribution system; optimization methods; uncertainty modelling.

1. Introduction
Provision of electric energy for consumers is mostly based on having centralized generation which involves use
of conventional generators. Then, the generated electricity is transmitted via a transmission line to substations
where the voltage is step down before the electricity is distributed for energy consumption. However, the
centralized generation is characterized by the following challenges including transmission and distribution
losses, high cost of fossil fuels, and greenhouse effect (greenhouse effect is a process whereby some of the
sunlight energy to the earth is been trap by the atmosphere). Therefore, the distributed generators (DGs) have
been adopted to overcome these challenges. Dispersed generation, district generation, decentralized generation,
embedded generation, local generation, and on site generation, are all terms that refer to DG.
In order to help understand the DG concept, there are different definitions of DG in the existing literature [1-8],
which are defined from the perspective of location and/or capacity.
With respect to location, DG can be defined as electric power generation source connected directly to
distribution network or on the customer side (very close to the demand) [1, 2]. Also, it means small generating
units installed in strategic places of the power network close to load centres [3-5]. In perspective of capacity,
DG is a large number of small size power (500 kW and 1 MW) generating unit which are distributed within the
distribution network [6]. While, others defined DG as the strategic placement of small power generating units
(rating from 5 kW to 25 MW) at or near customer loads [2]. In perspective of location and capacity, DG is a
small unit of power (usually with rating from less than 1 kW to many tens of MW) that is not a part of a large
central power network and is located close to the load [7]. Small generation units of 30 MW or less located at or
near consumer centres are also referred to with the same term [8]
In general, DG is defined as an electric power source connected directly to the distribution network or on the
customer site of the network [1]. From the perspective of size , Ackerman et al. [1] have classified DG into four
sizes as follows: micro distributed generation (1 W to 5 kW), small distributed generation (5 kW to 5 MW),
medium distributed generation (5 MW to 50 MW) and large distributed generation (50 MW to 300 MW).
Currently, DGs installation in power systems are rapidly increasing due to its ability to maximize the usage of
renewable energy such as wind, solar, hydro, geothermal, biomass and ocean energy etc. [1, 9-15]. According to
Borges et al, DGs can be used in an isolated way to supply the consumer's local demand or in an integrated way
to supply power to the remaining of the system [3]. Optimum priority during planning should be given to
location, size, and types of DG in order to maximize the benefits of DGs [11]. Optimal allocation of DGs
reduces system losses and leads to improvement in the voltage profile, enhances system reliability, load ability,
voltage stability, voltage security, and power quality.
DG is considered as an alternative solution to supply power for new costumers especially in the competitive
electricity market [5] for the following reasons : a) Quick response time and minimal risk to investment since it
is built in modules ; b) Small-size modules that can track load variation more closely; c) The government
approval for utilities and land availability can be discarded due to small physical size that can be installed at
load centers; d) The successive improvement of DG technologies.
In the following literature, most of the studies have been carried out to investigate optimal methodologies in
order to minimize the power losses and cost of DGs. For example, the authors in [16-19] have focused on
reviewing the optimization methods used in DGs planning considering objectives, decision variables, and DG
type applied constraints. While, in [20, 21] the authors have reviewed uncertainty modeling approaches for DGs
planning to show both the weakness and robustness of these methods.
It is clearly shown from the above description that all the published review work was restricted to consider the
DGs planning. According to the author's knowledge, there is no study that covers the uncertainty and
optimization methods concurrently, which is most important for any researcher in DGs planning. With the above
backdrop, the novelty of this work relates to review the optimization method used in DGs placement problem in
addition to uncertainties methods.
This paper is organized in the following manner. Section 2 represents the details of DG include the technologies
and types, applications and benefits. Section 3 illustrates the challenges to increased penetration of DG. Section
4 discusses DG planning models including objectives, constraints, uncertainties modeling methods, reliability
indices under uncertainties, market and economic operation aspects of renewable DGs under uncertainty and
mathematical algorithms. Finally, a conclusion is presented in section 5.
2. Distributed generation (DG)
2.1 Technologies and types
DGs technology can be classified into three types including renewable technology (green or sustainable), non-
renewable technology (traditional) and storage technology [22-26]. Renewable technology comprises wind,
solar (photovoltaic (PV) and thermal), bio-mass, geo-thermal, tidal and hydro-power (small and micro). Non-
renewable technology comprises micro-turbine, gas turbine, reciprocating engines and combustion turbine.
Storage technology comprises batteries, supercapacitor, flywheels, compressed air energy storage (CAES) and
pumped storage. Each technology has its own benefits and properties [12-27]. Furthermore, the deployment of
these technologies has started to take place in the electricity market, thereby providing an alternative means of
meeting the customer load demand. Figure 1 depicts the classification of DGs technologies.

Gas Turbine
Non-renewable Combustion Turbine
DG sources Reciprocating Engines
Micro Turbine

Wind
Solar
Distributed Generation Renewable DG Tidal
Technology sources Geo-Thermal
Hydro
Bio-mass

Batteries
Flywheel
Energy storage Supercapacitor
technologies CAES
Pumped storage

Figure 1: Distributed Generation Technologies

2.2 Applications
The types of DGs technologies that can be used in various applications according to the load requirements,
includes [28, 29]:
As stand-by sources for supplying the desired power for sensitive loads (e.g. hospitals) during grid
outages.
Standalone sources in isolated areas rural and remote areas.
As supply for peak loads at peak periods in order to reduce the power cost.
To combine heat and power (CHP), also known as Cogeneration, by injecting power into the network.
To supply part of load and support the grid by improving voltage profile, power quality and reducing
the power losses.
 Grid connection to sell electric power.

2.3 Benefits
Several benefits can be attained by connecting DGs to distribution systems. These benefits are categorized into
technical, economic and environmental benefit. Table 1, gives a description of these benefits according to their
category [22, 28-33].

Table 1. DG benefits
Technical point of view Economical point of view Environmental point of view

Integration of DG at strategic Deferred investments for upgrade Reduced output emissions of pollutants.
locations leads to reduced system of facilities. Reduce global warming
losses. Lowering operation and Encourages use of renewable energy
Integration of DG provides maintenance cost. System
enhanced voltage support thereby productivity is enhanced due to
improving voltage profile. diversification of resources.
Improved power quality. It results to an indirect monetary
Enhancement in system reliability benefit by reduce healthcare costs
and security. due to improved environment.
Power supply autonomy of rural or Reduced fuel costs due to increased
isolated areas. overall efficiency.
Increase overall electric power Reduced reserve requirements and
energy efficiency. associated costs.
Lower operating costs due to peak
shaving.
Reduction of investment risks.

3. Challenges
; commercial,
technical, environmental and regulatory. Overcoming of these challenges will lead to maximize the utilization of
DGs[14, 17]. These challenges are better explained in Figure 2.

DG
challenges

Commercial Technical Environmental Regulatory

recover the cost of Power Quality

implementation
establish an Voltage Rise Effect
developing an appropriate
incentive scheme
Protection regulatory policy
create a market
mechanism Stability

Figure 2: DG challenges

3.1 Commercial Challenges

The number of DGs can be increased by implementing active management approaches in distribution networks.
New commercial arrangements need to be used in order to support the development of active distribution
networks and extract the benefits associated with connecting increased amount of DGs. Generally, three
approaches are possible [34]:
1- To recover the cost of implementation the active management directly through price controls
mechanisms (increase the amount of recoverable capital and operate expenditure associated with active
management). Recovery of cost could be achieved by increasing the charges of network usage.
2- To establish an incentive scheme that would reward the companies for connecting DGs, as has been
recently developed in the United Kingdom [35]. These schemes could be funded from increasing the
charges imposed on generators and/or customers such as a green levy.
3- To create a market mechanism and a commercial environment to develop active networks.

3.2 Technical Challenges

3.2.1 Power Quality
Power quality commonly takes into account two important aspects: harmonic distortion of the network voltage
and transient voltage variations. DGs could decrease or increase the quality of the power factor, current and
voltage received by other users of the distribution network which depends on the particular circumstances.
Power quality improvement might be obtained by increasing the effect of network fault level. This is done
through adding DG to the network [34].

3.2.2 Voltage Rise Effect

Voltage rise effect can occur when connecting DGs in the network. This is the main factor that limits the
amount of extra DG capacity that can be connected to rural distribution networks. Optimal power flow under
equality and inequality constraints could be used to control instability of power supply, and active and reactive
power variations that are caused by the voltage rise effect [36, 37].

3.2.3 Protection
The connection of DGs to the distribution systems depends on some aspects that need to be identified [34].
These aspects are:
Protection of the generation equipment from internal faults.
Protection of the faulted distribution network from fault currents supplied by the DGs.
Anti-islanding or loss-of-mains protection (islanded operation of DG will be possible in future as
penetration of DG increases)

3.2.4 Stability
The design of distribution network and transmission network are considering the factor of stability under the
impact of different circumstances. As a result, the issue of stability was not recommended to discuss. While, it is
worthy to account the stability in case of dealing with DGs, which is hardly subjected to change for bigger
network security. There are two areas that need to be considered to assess the renewable DG schemes: transient
(first swing stability) as well as long term dynamic stability and voltage collapse [34].
3.3 Environmental
Increase DG usage is not always beneficial for the environment [38]. This is depending on the market share of
the different DGs technologies. For example, DGs technologies which consume fossil fuels like fuel cells, micro
turbines have more impact on the environment than renewable energy technology like hydroelectric, wind
turbines and solar cells. However, even technologies such as Wind turbine are claimed to be environmentally
damaging. As such it is critical to consider each technology carefully.

3.4 Regulatory
It seems that the developing of appropriate policies is so important to support the integration of DGs into
distribution networks due to the absence of clear governmental regulations [39].

4. DG Planning Models
Optimal planning of distribution networks is a process to help supplying the power to loads of feeders in the
presence of DGs in order to achieve maximum potential benefits of DGs with minimum costs. Optimal DG
planning depends on two factors, technical constraints and the optimization of economic targets. Technical
constraints refer to equipment capacity, voltage drop, radial structure of the network, reliability indices. The
optimization of economic targets includes minimization of investment and operating costs, minimization of
energy imported from transmission, minimization of energy loss, and reliability costs [40].

4.1 Objectives of DG integration

The objective functions that are mainly used in DG integration are as follows [11].
Maximization of renewable DG penetration.
Maximization of system reliability.
Maximization of Distributed Generation Capacity.
Maximization of social welfare and voltage profits.
Reduction in system losses and improvement in voltage profile.
Minimization of investment, operational cost and total payments toward compensating for system
losses.
Minimization of line loss.

4.2 Constraints of DG Planning

There are two types of constraints, equality constraints and inequality constraints.
1. Equality constraints consist of active and reactive power balance at each bus of the system.
2. Inequality constraints consist of voltage profile limits, line thermal limit, phase angle limit,
traditional active and reactive power generation limits, substation transformer capacity limit, DG
active and reactive power generation limits, number of DG limit, short circuit le
delivery power limit, power factor limit, tap position limit, total line loss limit, short circuit ratio
limit and voltage step limits [11, 41].
4.3 Modeling of Uncertainties in the Planning of Renewable DGs
4.3.1 Uncertain parameters
Uncertain parameters can be classified into two different groups as follows [42]:
a. Technical parameters: includes demand values, generation values, forced outage of lines and generators
or metering devices.
b. Economic parameters: includes uncertainty in the fuel supply, cost of production, market prices,
business taxes, labor and raw materials, economic growth, unemployment rates, gross domestic product
and inflation rates.
The abovementioned uncertain parameters are shown in Fig. 3.

Demand values
Generation values
technical parameters Failure or outage of
lines
Generation outage

uncertain
parameters
Economic growth
Price level
Cost of production
economical parameters
Unemployment rates
Gross domestic product
Inflation rates

Figure 3: Uncertain parameters

4.3.2 Uncertainty Modelling Methods

There are several uncertainty handling approaches developed for dealing with the abovementioned uncertain
parameters as illustrated in Fig. 4. This figure derives from ref. [20, 21] and gives a summary of the appropriate
PDP (Power Distribution Problem) approaches to model uncertainty parameters. These approaches include
robust optimization, interval analysis, probabilistic approach, possibilistic method, hybrid possibilistic -
probabilistic approaches and information gap decision theory (IGDT) [20, 21]. The fundamental aim of these
approaches is to measure the influence of uncertain input parameters on the output parameters in distribution
networks. The details of these methods are described as follows:

a. Robust optimization (RO): Robust optimization approach was proposed by Soyster in 1973 [43]. In this
method, the uncertainty groups are used to describe the uncertainty related to input parameters. The
advantage of applying this technique is to obtain decisions that remain optimal for the worst-case
investigation of the uncertain parameter within a specific group. In [44], the authors have proposed
adaptive RO approach for multi-period economic dispatch under high level of wind resources
penetration. Also this approach has been proposed in [45] to carry out an endogenous stress test for the
spot prices as a function of the buy-and-sell portfolio of contracts and green energy generation
scenarios. RO is adopted for scheduling of multi-micro grid systems considering uncertainties in
variable renewable sources, forecasted load values and market prices [46]. The authors in [47] have
established a RO with adjustable uncertainty budget (RO-AUB) model for coordinating reliability and
 economy of a large-scale hybrid wind/photovoltaic/hydro/thermal power system during uncertainty
period in order to reduce the limitation while taking full advantage of clean energy and improving
reliability of the system. RO method has been proposed in [48] to manage uncertainties related to
electricity prices and battery demand. Also this method has been used in [49] to simulate the
uncertainties associated with the load demand and the output power of the renewable DGs. In [50], RO
is used to model the uncertainties associated with the electricity prices.
b. Interval analysis (IA): In 1966, Moore introduced interval analysis technique [51] assuming that the
uncertain parameters are obtained values from a recognized interval. It is somewhat similar to the
probabilistic modelling with a uniform PDF (probability density function). This technique finds the
bounds of output variables. In [52] the probabilistic distribution-based interval arithmetic approach has
been proposed to evaluate the effects of the uncertainties related to load demand. An approach based
on the interval analysis has been proposed to solve the directional overcurrent relays coordination
problem considering uncertainty in the network topology [53]. In [54], interval analysis techniques has
been used to quantify the impact of uncertain data and to maximize the possibility of reliability
improvement and/or loss reduction. The author in [55] have proposed interval analysis method for
power flow solution of balanced radial distribution system.
c. Probabilistic approaches: One of the earliest work in probabilistic approach was carried out by
Dantzing in 1955 [56]. This technique assumed that the PDF of input parameters variables are known.
Probabilistic approaches can be classified into two groups: numerical and analytical approaches.
1. Numerical approaches

Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS) is one of the most common and accurate stochastic approach. This
approach has been used in [57] to systematically sample from random processes (i.e. uncertainty in the
load demands, the available capacity of conventional generation resources and the time-varying,
intermittent renewable resources, with their temporal and spatial correlations, as discrete-time random
processes) and emulate the side-by-side power system and transmission-constrained day-ahead market
operations. In [58], MCS with the traditional Newton Raphson method have been used to ensure the
coverage of all the possible operating scenarios of the system based on the operating system boundaries
and the accuracy of the solution. In [59],the problem of renewable DGs penetration in medium voltage
distribution networks has been modelled with MCS which takes into account for the intrinsic variability
of electric power consumption. In [60], MCS has been used to deal with the uncertainties related to
load values, generated power of wind turbines and electricity market price. Also in [61], the uncertainty
associated with load growth has been modelled by MCS, which delivers an estimate of the network
response to a set of possible future load scenarios. The uncertainties related to intermittent generation
of PVs and load demands are modelled by MCS in [62]. The authors in [63] have used combined MCS
technique and optimal power flow to maximize the social welfare considering different combinations of
wind speed and load demands over a year. In [64], MCS has been proposed to handle uncertainties
including the stochastic output power of a plug-in electric vehicle (PEV), wind speed, solar irradiance,
volatile fuel prices used by a fueled DG, and future uncertain load growth in the optimal siting and
sizing of DGs. There are three types of MCS approach used for probabilistic uncertainty analysis:
 Sequential Monte Carlo Simulation, Pseudo-Sequential Monte Carlo Simulation and Non Sequential
Monte Carlo Simulation.

1.1 Sequential Monte Carlo Simulation (SMCS):

Sequential Monte Carlo methods, also known as particle methods, are a class of sequential simulation-
based algorithms which provide a convenient and attractive approach to compute the posterior
distribution [65]. In [66] SMCS has been applied to assess distribution system reliability. The authors
in [67] have used SMCS in order to preserve the characteristics of the time series of the variable energy
sources and the variable load. A Sequential Monte Carlo method enhanced by a temporal wind storm
sampling strategy was introduced in [68] to evaluate the impacts of wind storms on power distribution.
In [69], a pattern search-based optimization method was proposed in conjunction with a SMCS to
optimally find the size of the hybrid system components and satisfy the reliability requirements. The
authors in [70] have developed the SMCS in order to evaluate adequacy of power systems with wind
farms.

1.2 Pseudo-Sequential MCS:

Leite da Silva in 1994 proposed, for the first time, Pseudo-Sequential Monte Carlo simulation which is
based on the non-sequential sampling of system states and on the chronological simulation of only the
sub-sequences associated with failed states [71]. In [72], a method based on the pseudo-sequential
MCS technique has been proposed to evaluate the impact of high photovoltaic (PV) power penetration
rgy and reserve deployment. The authors in [73] have
developed a new tool for the reliability assessment of the future smart distribution network (SDN)
based on a Pseudo-Sequential MCS. In [74], pseudo-chronological simulation was introduced to
evaluate loss of load indices, with particular emphasis on loss of load cost assessment, for composite
generation and transmission systems considering time varying loads for different areas or buses.

1.3 Non-Sequential MCS:

This method known as the state sampling approach. An efficient method for composite system well-
being evaluation based on non-sequential MCS is presented in [75].Also in [76], non-Sequential MCS
is presented to evaluate reliability indices of composite system. In [77], a novel approach based on
non-sequential MCS and pattern recognition techniques was proposed to evaluate well-being indices
for a composite generation. The authors in [78], have developed an original non-sequential Monte
Carlo simulation tool in order to calculate the optimal dispatch of classical generation in order to
minimize polluting gases emissions in presence of wind power. Also, in [79] a calculation method of
-Sequential MCS is presented.

2. Analytical methods:

The basic idea of the analytical approach is to do arithmetic with probability density function (PDF) of
stochastic inputs variables. The analytical methods can be classified into two groups: based on
linearization and basedon PDF approximation.
 2.1 Based on linearization: the first group of analytical methods are based on linearization such as
Convolution method:
Convolution method has been used in [80] to deduce the density functions of the unknown quantities
but the main problem associated with this method is that the technique demands a large amount of
storage and computation time in large systems. The authors in [81] have noted this problem and tried to
solve it by applying the discrete frequency domain convolution method to reduce the computational
burden.
Cumulants method:
Cumulants method was introduced to prevent the convolution operation that appears in the calculation
of the PDF of a linear combination of several random variables. In [82] the cumulant method for the
probabilistic optimal power flow problem was introduced and the results using the cumulant method
had a substantial reduction in computational expense while maintaining a high level of accuracy
compared with the results from MCS. Cumulant based stochastic reactive power planning method in
distribution systems with integration of wind generators has been proposed in [83].

Taylor series expansion:

Taylor series expansion usually is used to approximate a function. This expansion gives quantitative
estimates on the error in this approximation. in [84] Taylor series expansion is proposed for power
system state estimation and reliability assessment. In [85] Taylor series expansion of the Markov chain
stationary distribution is introduced in order to propagate parametric uncertainty to reliability and
performability indices in Markov reliability and reward models.
First Order Second moment method (FOSMM):
FOSMM is a probabilistic method to determine the stochastic moments of a function with random input
variables which allows the estimation of uncertainty in the output variable without knowing the shapes of
PDFs of input variables in detail. This method has been applied in [86] in order to deal with the
uncertainties that effects in the computation of transfer capability, transmission reliability margin (TRM).
In [87], a new probabilistic load flow method based on the FOSMM has been proposed to solve the
probabilistic load flow problems. The aim of this method is to obtain the mean and standard deviation of
load flow solution distributions considering various uncertainties in system operation. The authors in [88]
have presented a formulation of probabilistic optimal power flow problem using the FOSM method to
model the uncertainties and correlations of the system load.
2.2 Based on PDF approximation: the second group of analytical methods are based on the PDF
approximation such as:

Point estimate method (PEM):

The point estimation method concentrates on the statistical data provided by the first few central
moments of uncertain input. In [89] probabilistic power flow method based on the PEM was introduced
to handle various sources of uncertainties including output of the wind power generators and load
demands. In [90], PEM was used to model the uncertainties related to wind power outputs and volatile
electricity prices in a competitive electricity market. In [91] PEM has been used for energy management
 in order to minimize the cost and increase the efficiency. In [92] two-point estimate method was
proposed to model the uncertainties associated with volatile electricity price, load demand and wind
speed. In [93] a new probabilistic framework based on 2m Point Estimate Method (2m PEM) has been
proposed to consider the uncertainties in the optimal energy management of the Micro Grids including
different renewable power sources.
Unscented Transformation (UT):
The UT is a powerful method in assessing stochastic problems with/without correlated uncertain
variables. In [94]
UT method has been presented. In [95] UT was used to study the impact of transformer correlations in
state estimation. In [96] UT was provided to calculate the mean and covariance of nonlinear functions of
random variables (which represent power system measurements as nonlinear functions of the power
system state).

c. Possibilistic approach: In 1965, Zadeh introduced the concept of fuzzy arithmetic [97] where the input
parameters are described by using the membership functions. In [98], a fuzzy evaluation tool was
proposed for analysing the effect of renewable DGs on active power losses and the ability of
distribution network in load supply at presence of uncertainties. In [99] a new method according to
fuzzy extension principle has been proposed to represent and propagate the possibilistic uncertainties
associated with wind power in power system. In [100] a new possibilistic fuzzy model was presented
for multi-objective optimal planning of distribution systems which finds multi objective solutions
corresponding to the simultaneous optimization of the fuzzy economic cost, level of fuzzy reliability,
and exposure (optimization of robustness) of the network. In framework of possibilistic harmonic load
flow, the authors in [101] proposed an improved approach which overcomes possibilitiy of interaction
between input parameters.

d. Hybrid possibilistic probabilistic approaches: In this technique, random and possibilistic parameters
are presented to handle the uncertain parameters [102, 103]. A brief explanation of these approaches is
described as follows:
Fuzzy and Monte Carlo: The authors in [103] have used Fuzzy and Monte Carlo Simulation as a
hybrid possibilistic probabilistic evaluation tool for analysing the effect of uncertain power
production of renewable DGs on active power losses of distribution networks.
Fuzzy scenario based approach: The authors in [104] have presented a hybrid possibilistic
probabilistic tool to assess the impact of DG units on technical performance of distribution
network with taken into account the uncertainty of electric loads, DG operation/investments .

e. Information gap decision theory (IGDT): In 1980, Yakov Ben-Haim proposed IGDT [105]. This
technique does not use PDF and membership function (MF) for input parameters. However, it
measures the differences between parameters and their estimation. The authors in [106] have applied
IGDT in order to handle the uncertainties associated with the uncertainties related to wind speed. In
[49], IGDT has been used to model the uncertainty in the load and output of the renewable DGs. In
 [107], IGDT has been proposed for distribution network operator (DNO) when it is faced with
different uncertainties in load demands and renewable DGs . In [108], IGDT has been proposed to
address the uncertainty related to renewable DGs.

Uncertainty modeling
approaches

Hybrid
Robust Interval based
Probabilistic IGDT probabilistic and Possibilistic
optimization analysis possibilistic

Numerical Analytical Fuzzy and Fuzzy and

method method Monte Carlo Scenario based
approach

Monte Carlo Based on Based on PDF

simulation (MCS) linearization approximation

Point estimate
Sequential MCS Convolution method

Cumulants Unscented
Transformation
Pseudo- (UT)
Sequential MCS Taylor series
expansion

Non Sequential First Order

MCS Second moment

Figure 4: Uncertainty modeling approaches

A summary of uncertainty approaches used in DGs is presented in Table 2, while Table 3 depicts the
advantages and disadvantages of uncertainty modeling approaches.

Table 2. Summary of uncertainty modeling

Uncertainty modeling approaches References
Robust optimization [44-49]
Interval analysis [52-55]
Probabilistic approach Sequential MCS [66-70]
Pseudo-Sequential MCS [72-74]
Non-Sequential MCS [75-79]
Convolution method [80, 81]
Cumulants [82, 83]
Taylor series expansion [84, 85]
First Order Second moment [86-88]
Point estimate method [89-91]
Unscented Transformation (UT) [94-96]
Possibilistic [98, 99, 109]
Hybrid probabilistic and possibilistic Fuzzy and Monte Carlo [103]
Fuzzy scenario based approach
[104]
Information gap decision theory (IGDT)
[49, 106, 107]
 Table 3. Summary of Evaluation of Uncertainty modeling approaches
Uncertainty modeling approaches Advantages Disadvantages References

Robust optimization It is useful when only an It is difficult to employ in

[43-49]
interval exists nonlinear problems
Interval analysis It is useful when just an Cannot put the connection
[51-55]
interval exists among intervals
Probabilistic Sequential MCS Sequential MCS requires a
This method does represent
(Numerical) more substantial computational
chronological aspects in
effort than the other
order that it is the most [65-70, 110]
approaches, and may be
flexible strategy for assessing
infeasible for some
distribution system reliability
applications
Pseudo-Sequential MCS The number of simulations
It is easy to implement
needed increases as the
and faster than the [71-74]
degrees of freedom of the
conventional SMCS
solution area increases
Non-Sequential MCS cannot simulate the
Non-Sequential MCS has
chronological aspects of [75-79, 111]
high computational efficiency
system operation
Probabilistic Based on Convolution This method has greater Requires a large amount of
(Analytical) linearization method accuracy while providing a storage and time especially
[80, 81]
breakthrough in when there are many functions
computational speed involved due to large systems.
Cumulants The loss of accuracy The technique demands a large
associated with truncation of amount of storage and
[82, 83]
the order of the cumulants computation time in large
used systems
Taylor series It allows for incredibly
Some calculations become
expansion accurate (depending on the
tedious or the series doesn't [84, 85]
number of terms) estimates of
converge quickly.
common functions
First Order Allows the estimation of
Second uncertainty in the output
moment variable without knowing the Complicated [86-88]
shapes of PDFs of input
variables in detail
Based on PDF Point estimate It only gives the mean and
approximation method [PEM] standard deviation of the
It is a non-iterative, uncertain output, no
computationally efficient information about the shape of
technique. the PDF of the output is
[89-91]
simple and easy to provided, gives more reliable
implement. There is no answers for non-skewed PDFs,
convergence problem The accuracy would be low
when the number of random
variables is large
Unscented efficiency, the accuracy
Transformation would not decrease when the Its running time depends on
(UT) number of random variables number of uncertain variables
is large, applicable to and it is only applicable in
[94-96]
problems with correlation problems which the input
among multiple uncertain variables are described using
input parameters and it is their PDF
easy to implement
Possibilistic It can convert linguistic
information to numerical Complicated [97, 109]
values
Hybrid Fuzzy and Monte Carlo It is time consuming [103]
probabilistic Fuzzy scenario based approach
and
high computational efficiency Its accuracy is low [104]
possibilistic

Information gap decision theory (IGDT) It is useful for decision in

Too complicated [49, 105-107]
severe uncertainties

4.3.3 Reliability indices under uncertainty

Power system reliability is one of the most important issues in the power system planning and operation. It can
be divided into two parts, adequacy and security. Chowdhury et al in [112] have presented a reliability model
for determining the DG equivalence to a distribution facility for using in distribution system planning studies in
the new competitive environment. This model has been extended based on the Distribution Reliability
(DISREL) program in order to include: System Average Interruption Frequency Index (SAIFI), System Average
Interruption Duration Index (SAIDI), Customer Average Interruption Frequency Index (CAIFI), Average
Service Availability Index (ASAI), Average Service Unavailability Index (ASUI), EUE (in kWh per year) , and
expected outage cost in dollars ($). In [113-118] several reliability indices and their corresponding costs are
calculated in order to quantitatively measure system reliability and its economic impact. In [119] SAIFI and
SAIDI have been calculated as a part of solving the multistage planning problem of a distribution network. In
[120], SAIFI, SAIDI, ASAI are calculated in order to quantitatively measure system reliability and its economic
impact. Reference [121] has addressed the incorporation of uncertainty and reliability indices (SAIFI, SAIDI,
ASAI, Expected energy not supplied (EENS)) in the joint expansion planning of distribution network assets and
renewable DGs. The authors in [122] have applied a genetic algorithm based on a probabilistic load flow and
used different scenarios to model the uncertainty in load demand and wind power generation. Also, reliability
was assessed in two stages, namely fault location and fault repair. In [123] the uncertainty associated with the
output wind power generation , load types and load variability have been modeled as a multi-state variable by a
probability density function. Genetic algorithm was used in order to allow assessing reliability by the calculation
of nodal interruption costs based on Monte Carlo simulation. In [124], SAIFI, SAIDI and CAIDI to evaluate the
reliability of distribution networks in the presence of wind power are calculated by using the Monte Carlo
simulation method. The authors in [125], have evaluated the reliability performance of distribution systems
considering uncertainties in both generation and load demands. Reference [126] has presented analytical
approach for the reliability modeling of large wind farms. In [127], the fuzzy numbers approach for reliability
calculation of electrical energy indices was proposed. In [128], Monte-Carlo simulation approach to
distribution/transmission reliability evaluation assuming loads defined by fuzzy numbers has been introduced.
In [129], a fuzzy operation technique for load duration curve modeling in order to evaluate reliability indices of
composite power systems based on probability and fuzzy set methods has been presented. In [130], a
possibilistic approach using fuzzy set has been introduced to calculate the possibilistic reliability indices (loss-
of-load expectation) according to the degree of uncertainty. In [131], a genetic algorithm guided by fuzzy
numbers to evaluate the distribution system EENS index has been introduced. In [132], according to the
randomness of output power of renewable DGs and the time series characteristic of load, a reliability evaluation
model based on sequential Monte Carlo simulation for distribution system has been proposed. In [133] a
reliability model has been presented to study the impacts of demand response programs on short-term reliability
assessment of wind integrated distribution systems.

4.3.4 Market and economic operation aspects of renewable DGs under uncertainty
Planning and operation of power system has become much more complicated with integration of renewable
energy resources and has brought great challenges to its economy and regulation [134]. The uncertainties related
to future load growth, output power of renewable DGs, demand response and prices are some of the challenges.
These challenges created new field for developing new methodologies for the system operation in the presence
of controllable loads. The primary objective of proactive customers is to reduce their electricity payments to
increase savings, hence they tend to rely on price-based schemes for managing local generation and load
resources. In [135], an interior point method has been used to solve the optimal power flow problem with a
multi-objective optimization problem for maximizing both social benefit and the distance to maximum loading
conditions. In [136], load and price uncertainties within a distribution electricity market environment have been
discussed. In [137] uncertainty in future load estimation as well as renewable DG power production have been
introduced by probabilistic approaches. In [138] the uncertainties related to load demand and renewable
generation have been modelled by using fuzzy-based method. Demand side management is a set of techniques,

consumptions [139]. The authors in [140] proposed a combined MCS and optimal power flow to maximize the
social welfare with integrating demand response scheme considering different combinations of wind generation
and load demand over a year. A stochastic modeling for electric capacity expansion planning under uncertainty
in demand has been presented in [141]. In [142] Monte Carlo simulation methods has been used for modeling
the uncertainties associated with load demand and renewable sources power production . In[143], the genetic
algorithm and the market-based optimal power flow has been proposed to jointly maximize the net present value
within a distribution market
environment. In [144] a market-based optimal power flow has been used for optimally allocating wind turbines
in order to maximise social welfare considering different combinations of load demand and wind generation.
Stochastic programming approach Proposed in [145] for reactive power scheduling of a micro-grid considering
the uncertainty of wind power. The authors in [146] have used Monte Carlo simulation method and market-
based optimal power flow to maximize the social welfare with integration of demand side management scheme
considering different combinations of wind generation and load demand over a year. In [147], in order to model
the random nature of load demand and wind forecast errors, a scenario-based stochastic programming
framework has been presented. In [148] Monte Carlo simulation method has been used to determine a
probabilistic hourly/seasonal model for wind and solar based DGs, and the system demand. To solve the
problem of uncertainties of renewable DG output and load, multi-scenario technique has been adopted in [149].
In [150] price uncertainty has been modeled through robust optimization technique using duality properties and
exact linear equivalences. In [151] Price uncertainty has been modeled by a simple linear programming
algorithm which can be easily integrated in the energy management system of a household or a small business.
The authors in [152] have proposed a probabilistic method for active distribution networks planning with
integration of demand response. Optimal demand response and energy storage system scheduling for
distribution losses payments minimization under electricity price uncertainty has been presented in [50]. In
[153], a method for evaluating investments in decentralized renewable distribution network considering price
volatility has been presented. In [154], a Monte Carlo simulation-based approach has been proposed for
distribution network planning to capture the uncertainties related to the price volatility of renewable DG.

4.4 Mathematical Algorithm and Solution Techniques for DG planning (DGP)

Due to the increasing penetration of DGs in distribution network, the location and sizing of DGs in distribution
network planning is becoming increasingly important. Various optimization methods employed in DGP to solve
different DG problems (optimal location and/or sizing). Briefly, these methods can be divided into three main
sets:
 1. Conventional methods are also called classical or non-heuristic methods. It includes linear
programming (LP), non-linear programming (NLP), mixed integer non-linear programming (MINLP),
dynamic programming (DP), optimal power flow-based Approach (OPFA), direct approach (DA),
ordinal optimization (OO), analytical approach (AA) and continuous power flow(CPF).
2. Intelligent search-based methods are also called heuristic methods. It includes simulated annealing
(SA), evolutionary algorithms (EAs), tabu search (TS), particle swarm optimization (PSO) ant colony
system algorithm (ACSA), artificial bee colony (ABC), artificial immune system (AIS), bacterial
foraging optimization algorithm (BFOA), bat algorithm (BA), imperialist competitive algorithm
(ICA), cuckoo search algorithm (CSA), intelligent water Drop (IWP) algorithm and fuzzy set theory
(FST).
3. The prospective methods include firefly algorithm (FA), shuffled frog leaping algorithm (SFLA), and
big bang-big (BB-BC) algorithm.

4.4.1 Conventional methods (Non-Heuristic)

A) Linear programming (LP)
Linear programming (LP) is defined as a mathematical technique used for optimization of linear objective
functions and linear constraints [155]. In [156, 157] LP was employed to solve optimal DG placement (ODGP)
problem to achieve maximum DG penetration. Also Abou El-Ela et al. [158] used LP to investigate of varying
ratings and locations of DG for losses minimizing in order to maximize DG benefits.

B) Nonlinear programming (NLP)

The nonlinear programming (NLP) refers to fact that the computation in this method is based on the derivatives.
Solving a nonlinear programming problem could be done by first choosing a search direction in an iterative
procedure which is specified by the first partial derivatives of the equation (the reduced gradient). This method
is referred to as first-order method and includes the generalized reduced gradient method [159]. The second
order methods such as successive quadratic programming [160] and Newton Raphson method [161] require the
counting of the second order partial derivatives of the power-flow equations and other constraints. Rau and Yih-
Heui [162] have employed a second order algorithm to compute the capacity of DGs in selected nodes to obtain
optimum quantities and maximized benefits of DGs. In [163], the Newton Raphson method was introduced to
find optimal size and optimal placement of DGs in order to obtain the optimization of both cost and loss. Also
the study focused on optimization of weighting factors which balance the cost and the loss factors.

C) Mixed-integer nonlinear programming (MINLP)

MINLP was used to solve DGP problem with integer variables with values (0 or 1) to represent if a new DG
should be installed [164]. The proposed model in [165] integrated comprehensive optimization model and

General Algebraic Modeling System (GAMS) using binary decision variables with an objective function for
minimizing the total system cost. In [166] the optimal planning problem is formulated as MINLP, with an
objective function for minimizing the energy losses and for optimally allocating with wind DGs in the
distribution network. Atwa et al. [167] have used different types of renewable DGs such as wind and solar in
order to minimize the annual power losses considering network constraints. In [168], the authors have employed
a MINLP method to find the optimal size and site for the different types of DGs by considering the electricity
market price volatility. Also, MINLP was used to determine the optimal placement and number of DGs in
hybrid electricity market [169]. The optimal problem for location and sizing of DG is formulated by using
MINLP, with an objective of improving the voltage stability margin considering the probabilistic nature of the
renewable energy resources and the load [170]. In [171], multi-period OPF used in order to improve the hosting
capacity of distribution systems by applying both static and dynamic reconfiguration considering active network
management (ANM) schemes. In [172], MINLP is proposed to solve DGP planning problem in order to
minimize the total operational cost.

D) Dynamic programming (DP)

Dynamic programming (DP) algorithm is an approach that guaranties optimal solution of multi-stage decision
problems [173, 174]. Celli et al. [173] have used DP for planning active distribution network with DGs in order
to reduce the capital expenditures (CAPEX) and operational expenditures (OPEX). In addition, real-world
examples are provided to illustrate the effectiveness of DP for active distribution networks. In [174] DP is used
to solve multi-period planning problem with such as minimization of investment and interruption costs and
losses. In [175], DP is proposed to determine the optimal feeder routes and branch conductor sizes with
simultaneous optimization of cost and reliability. Khalesi et al. [176] have used DP to solve multi-objective
optimization problem in order to determine the optimal site of DGs in the distribution network to minimize
power losses and improve both the voltage profile and reliability.
E) Optimal Power Flow-based Approach (OPFA)
OPFA has been developed to increase the capacity of DG and identify available headroom on the system within
the imposed thermal and voltage constraints [177]. Dent et al. [36] have used OPF based method considering
security constraints to optimally accommodate DGs in the network. In [178], an OPF used to find the optimal
capacity and placement of DGs in order to minimize the operational cost. Also in this work, Locational
Marginal Price (LMP) is determined as the Lagrangian Multiplier of the power balance equation in OPF. The
authors in [179] have proposed OPF to minimize the energy cost taking into account the goodness factor of each
DG on the distribution system. The aim of [180, 181] is to find optimal location and size of new DGs
considering the fault level constraints (FLCs) in the OPF problem. The authors in [182, 183] have proposed a
multi-period AC OPF to evaluate the optimal size of new DGs which are able to be connected to a distribution
network when active network management (ANM) control strategies are in operation. In [184] an OPF is used

in the study of different integration concepts, including network losses, voltage profile and line capacity.

F) Direct approach (DA)

Direct approach (DA) is introduced in [185] to reduce the inherent difficulties toward the solution and provides
optimum solution at the same time in order to solve the ODGP problem. In [186] DA is applied for optimal
planning by focusing on the minimum cost and higher power reliability in radial distribution systems. In [187]
DA was proposed to find the optimal size of fixed and switched capacitors in order to minimize the power losses
and maximize the savings in a radial distribution system.

G) Ordinal Optimization (OO)

Ordinal optimization (OO) approach presented in [188] to find optimal site and size of DGs with discrete and
continuous variables in order to minimize the losses and maximize the capacity of DGs. In [189], OO approach
is applied to find the best solution for planning of distribution network with integration of electric vehicles
(EVs). Zou et al. in [190] have proposed OO to obtain the optimal solution for ODGP considering the
uncertainties related to renewable DGs and capability curve of them to improve the voltage profile, voltage
stability and reduce the active power losses.

H) Analytical Approaches (AA)

Wang et al. [191] have applied analytical approaches to determine the optimal location of DGs in radial
distribution systems in order to minimize the power losses. AA are not iterative algorithms in order that there is
no convergence problems involved, therefore, the results could be obtained very quickly. In [192, 193] both the
optimal sizing and siting of DGs are determined by an analytical method to minimize the total power losses. In
[194] an analytical method proposed to obtain the optimal combination of different DG types in a distribution
system such as size, location and operating point in order to minimize the losses. This method applies in two test
systems with different configurations by establishing a comparison with the exact optimal solution obtained
from the exhaustive optimal power flow (OPF) algorithm. In [15, 195, 196], analytical expressions are proposed
to find an optimal size and power factor of DGs to minimize the power losses in a primary distribution network.

I) Continuation Power Flow (CPF)

Continuation power flow (CPF) method was presented in [197] to determine the optimal placement of DGs in a
distribution network in order to improve the voltage profile, reduce the power losses, increase the power transfer
capacity and maximize the loading and voltage stability. Hemdan and Kurrat have used CPF to analyze the
systems to optimally allocate DGs in distribution systems in order to meet increasing demand, obtaining more
benefits from DGs, decreasing the losses and improving the voltage profile [198].
Summary of literature review for GDP using conventional techniques can be shown in Table 4.
 Table 4. Summary of literature review for GDP using conventional techniques
Conventional methods References Objective function Contribution Uncertain parameter Mathematical modeling of
Uncertainty

linear programming (LP) Keane & O'Malley Maximum capacity The optimal DG placement is solved using LP and take Not modelled
(2005) [156] advantage of the interdependence of the buses with respect
to the system constraints.
Keane & Malley (2007) Maximize profit LP is used to find the optimal model that maximizes the Not modelled
[157] quantity of energy that may be reaped from a given area by
taking into account its available energy resources.
Abou El-Ela et al. Improve voltage and reduce LP is used for (1) demonstrating the influence of DG sitting Not modelled
(2010) [158] line loss and sizing to maximize the benefit of DG and (2)
confirming the optimization results obtained by genetic
algorithm (GA).
Nonlinear programming Rau & Wan (1994) Minimize real power loss Second order algorithm was proposed to compute the Not modelled
(NLP) [162] amount of resources in selected nodes.
Ghosh et al. (2010) Minimize both cost and power Newton Raphson method was used to find the optimal Not modelled
[163] loss sitting and sizing in DG by focusing on optimization of
weighting factor, which balances the cost and the loss
factors.
El-Khattam et al. (2005) Minimize investment and Optimal DG model is implemented as an economical Load demand growth Scenario-based approach
Mixed-integer nonlinear [165] operating costs alternative option in integrated model for solving the DGP
programming (MINLP) problem.
Atwa, et al. (2010) [167] Minimizing the energy losses MINLP proposed a probabilistic-based planning technique Load demand and renewable Scenario-based approach
for determining optimal site with different types of DG. DG
Kumar & GAO (2010) Minimization of total fuel cost Hybrid electricity market of optimal Location and number Not modelled
[169] and minimization line losses of DG is presented by MINLP approach.
in the network
Porkar et al. (2011) Minimize cost and maximize Optimal site, size, and different types of DG considering Not modelled
[168] total system benefit electricity market price fluctuation introduce by using
MINLP method.
Atwa, & El-Saadany Minimize annual energy loss A probabilistic-based planning technique for optimum Combined generation load Scenario-based approach
(2011) [166] capacity and location of wind DG in distribution systems is model
formulated as an MINLP.
Al Abri et al. (2013) Improve the voltage stability Optimal sitting and sizing of DGs is formulated by using load and renewable DG Scenario-based approach
[170] margin MINLP method. generation
Franco et al. Minimize operation and MINLP is proposed to solve long term expansion planning Not modelled
(2014)[172] investigation cost and offers low computation time.
Capitanescu et al. (2015) Increase the hosting capacity ODGP problem is formulated as a MILP of multi-period Not modelled
[171] of DG optimal power flow to consider thermal and voltage
constraints by centralized ANM schemes.
Dynamic programming Celli et al. (2007) [173] minimizes the capital and DP is used to introduce optimal multiyear development plan Not modeled
(DP) operational expenditures of active distribution networks.
(CAPEX&OPEX)
Minimize cost of investment DP is used to improve the quality of multi-period solutions Not modeled
[174] loss and reliability in DG.
Khalesi et al. (2011) Minimize loss and enhance DP is used to solve multi-objective function of optimal Not modeled
 [176] reliability improvement and locations in DG network by taking into account the time-
voltage profile. varying loads.
Ganguly et al. (2013) Minimization of investment DP has been applied to solve distribution system expansion Not modelled
[175] and operational costs and planning problem, considering two variables decision feeder
maximization of reliability routes and branch conductor sizes.
Optimal Power Flow- Vovos, & Bialek (2005) Maximize profit OPF is developed to convert FLCs to simple nonlinear Not modeled
based Approach (OPFA) [180] inequality constraints.
Vovos, et al. (2005) Maximize profit OPFA find optimal capacity by taking into account fault Not modelled
[181] level constraints imposed by protection equipment such as
switchgear.
Harrison & Wallace Maximize DG capacity. OPFA has proposed to maximize the capacity of DG and Not modelled
(2005) [177] identifies available headroom on the system.
Gautam, & Maximization social welfare OPF techniques is used to find the optimal capacity and Not modeled
Mithulananthan (2007) and profit placement of DGs
[178]
Algarni and Minimize energy costs OPF method is used to minimize the distribution energy Not modelled
Bhattacharya (2009) costs in Disco power system tacking into account goodness
[179] factor of DGs.
Dent et al. (2010) [36] Maximize DG capacity OPF based method is used to determine the capacity of Not modelled
system to accommodate DGs. The results show voltage step
limit can be more restrictive of DG capacity than a voltage
level limit.
Ochoa et al. (2010) Maximize DG capacity Multi period AC optimal power flow is proposed to find Not modeled
[182] the optimal size of DGs when ANM control strategies are in
operation.
Ochoa& Harrison Minimizes energy losses Multi-period AC -OPF is used to determine the optimal site Load demand and renewable Scenario-based approach
(2011) [183] of renewable DGs. DGs
Karatepe et al. (2015) Minimize losses and improve OPFA including the output power uncertainties in DGs is output power of renewable Scenario-based approach
[184] voltage profile proposed to investigate the comparison between single-and DGs
multiple-DG concepts.
Direct approach (DA) Samui et al. (2012) Minimize the total annual cost DA is used to solve ODGP problem depending on tracking Not modelled
[185] and calculating the cost for radial paths.
Samui et al. (2012) Minimization planning cost. DA is higher effective in optimal feeder routing considering Not modeled
[186] role of reliability and planning cost of radial distribution
system.
Raju et al. (2012) [187] Improve the voltage profile DA is used to find the optimal location and size for Not modeled
and maximize the net saving capacitors in a radial power distribution system.
Ordinal optimization Jabr, R. A., & Pal, B. C. minimize losses and maximize Specific approaches have been chosen for the application of Not modelled
(OO) (2009) [188] capacity of DG OO for the optimal placement and sizing of DGs.
Zou, K et al. (2012) Reduce power losses ODGP model considering the uncertainties and DG reactive Not modeled
[190] capability has been developed by using OO.
Lin et al. (2014)[189] Minimize cost OO is applied for planning of distribution network Not modelled
problems with electric vehicle (EV) charging stations.
Analytical approaches Wang & Nehrir (2004 ) Minimize power losses of the Analytical methods are determined for optimal placement in Not modelled
(AA) [191] system DG in radial network system.
Gozel et al. (2005) [193] Minimize total power losses The optimal size and placement of DG in a radial feeder are Not modelled
and feeder losses determined by analytical method.
 Acharya & Minimize total losses AA is used to calculate the optimal size and placement of a Not modelled
Mithulananthan (2006) single DG.
[196]
Gözel and Hocaoglu Minimize power losses Employ loss sensitivity factor and based on the equivalent Not modelled
2009 [15] current injection to solve ODGP in radial system.
Hung et al. (2010) [195] Minimize losses AA is used to find the optimal size of DGs that have the Not modelled
capability to deliver both real and reactive power.
Elsaiah et al. (2014) Reduce total losses An analytical method is introduced to solve the optimal Not modelled
[192] location and size problem of DGs.
Mahmoud et al. (2015) Loss minimization Analytical method is employed to obtain the optimal Not modelled
[194] combination of different DG types.
Continuation power flow Hedayati et al. (2008) Improve voltage profile and placement of DG is based on the analysis of power flow Not modelled
(CPF) [197] reduce power losses continuation and determination of most sensitive buses to
voltage collapse
Hemdan, N. G., & Maximize load ability and CPF is proposed to solve ODGP problem. Not modelled
Kurrat, M. (2011) [198] voltage limit
4.4.2 Intelligent Searches (Heuristic Methods)
The heuristic methods based on intelligent searches have been implemented in the DG problem to treat with
local minimum problems and uncertainties.

A) Simulated Annealing (SA)

In 1983, SA was introduced by Kirkpatrick et al. [199] as a process to simulate the optimization problem as an
annealing process in order to find global optimal solutions. This approach has the ability of escaping local
minima by incorporating a probability function in accepting or rejecting new solutions. Authors in [200] have
used SA as an optimization tool to determine the optimum location and size of DG in order to minimize multi-
objective function including the active power losses, emission and contingency. Also in [201] SA is employed
to find optimal location and sizing of DGs to minimize the total losses and improve voltage profile in large
radial distribution system. Nahman et al. [202] have applied SA to find optimal solution for the planning of
radial distribution network in order to minimize the total cost.

B) Evolutionary Algorithms (EAs)

The flexibility of evolutionary algorithms (EAs) leads to widely employ these algorithms for solving power
system operation and planning problems. These algorithms are a population based optimization process and
converge to the global optimum solution with probability of one by a finite number of evolutionary steps
performed on a finite group of reasonable solutions [203, 204]. EAs are type of artificial intelligence methods
for optimization based on natural selection, such as mutation, recombination, crossover, reproduction and
selection operators on the population of individuals to perform the search. Also it is a subset of evolutionary
computation, which includes Evolutionary Programming (EP), Evolutionary Strategy (ES) and Genetic
Algorithm (GA). EP, ES and GA share many similarities [203, 205]. The authors in [10, 206] have used GA to
focus on the optimal placement and size of DGs with objective function to maximize the benefits related to DG
and minimize the power losses. GA and an improved Hereford ranch Algorithm HRA (variant of GA) are
implemented in [207] to determine the optimal sizing of DGs. In [208], GA and HRA are used to find optimal
location and size of DGs in a distribution network. In [209], GA is utilized to find optimal re-closer positions
when DGs are deployed in a securely optimal manner. Also in [210], GA is used to solve ODGP problem with
different load models in order to minimize the power losses. In [138], DG allocation strategy for radial
distribution networks under uncertainties related to load and generation using adaptive GA has been introduced
and the uncertainties of load and generation are modeled using fuzzy-based approach. El-Ela et al. [158] have
proposed GA to determine the optimal location and capacity of DG with multi-system constraints to achieve a
single or multi-objectives.
In [211], GA based method is employed to find optimal types, locations and sizes of DGs taking into account
the benefits and costs of DG. Furthermore, Borges et al. [3] have proposed GA technique to find optimal
placement and size of DGs to maximize the benefit/cost ratio of DG. In [212-214] the authors have combined
GA and OPF to find the best sites and capacities available for connecting a large number of DGs in the network.
Also, the combination of these methods is being as an efficient solution to minimize the overall cost. GA and ant
colony optimization (ACO) together with imperialist competitive algorithm (ICA) are proposed to solve the
feeder reconfiguration problem in DGs and focus on positive effectiveness of DGs in loss reduction and voltage
profile improvement [215]. In [216] a multi-objective programming method based on the non-dominated sorting
genetic algorithm (NSGA) is introduced to find maximum sets of distributed wind power generation in order to
minimize the power losses and short-circuit levels. In [217] NSGA-II and the market-based optimal power flow
has been proposed to minimize the total energy losses and maximize the net present value associated with the
wind power investment over a planning horizon. Ahmadi et al [218] have used the NSGA-II algorithm for
optimal site and size of DGs in the network in order to minimize the total cost and line losses and improve
voltage profile. Carrano et al. [61] have used NSGA-II with four local search strategies to solve the power
distribution network design problem taking into account three relevant aspects: monetary cost, reliability and
ability to deal with different scenarios of load growth. Also uncertainties related to load demands are modelled
by a Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) in order to produce an estimate of the network response into the set of
possible future load. Wang & Gao in [219] have used a non-revisiting genetic algorithm (NRGA), GA and
binary space partitioning (BSP) to reduce power losses.

C) Tabu Search (TS)

In 1986, Glover and Hansen have developed the first TS algorithm to solve the optimization issues [204]. This
approach is an effective solution to achieve optimization within a reasonably short time. Golshan et al. [220]
have applied TS method to determine the optimal locations and sizes of DGs in a distribution network along
with tap positions of voltage regulators (VRs) and network configuration. The objective function of this method
is to minimize the cost of power losses. Also Nara et al. [221] have implemented TS method to find how much
distribution loss can be reduced if DGs are optimally allocated at the demand side of the system. Maciel and
Padilha-Feltrin have proposed a multi-objective Tabu Search (MOTS) method to find the Pareto optimal set.
This study shows the comparison between MOTS and NSGA-II and confirmed that the MOTS method has a
less advantage than the NSGA-II especially in more complex analysis where time requirements become critical
[222].

D) Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO)

In 1995, Eberhart & Kennedy have proposed Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) for the first time [223]. The
original objective of their research inspired by social behavior bird flocking or fish schooling. Different variants
of the PSO algorithm were applied to different areas of electric systems problems, but the most standard one is
the global version of PSO (Gbest) model [224, 225]. Krueasuk & Ongsakul have used PSO method to determine
optimal sizes and locations of multi-DGs [226]. The main goal of this study is to minimize the total power
losses in the network. Beromi et al. [227] have suggested a PSO method to solve optimal DG size to improve
voltage profile, minimize losses and reduce total harmonic distortion (THD) in addition to dealing with both the
costs and site. Also [228] PSO approach is presented for optimal operation management of distribution networks
with DGs. The authors in [229] have combined PSO and market-based OPF to choose the optimal size and
number of wind turbines (WTs) in order to maximize net present value (NPV) within a distribution market
environment. In addition, Raj et al. [230] and Wong et al. [12] have employed PSO to identify the optimum
generation capacity and location of DG and provide maximum power quality. In [231], Multi-Objective Particle
Swarm Optimization (MOPSO) is used to determine optimal size of the DG considering multi objective criteria
to simultaneously minimize the power losses and improve voltage profile. In [232], PSO has been used for short
term planning of DGs to minimize the total operational cost, power losses and voltage stability index. In [233,
234], multi-objective PSO method is proposed to find optimal size and location of DGs considering load
uncertainty in distribution networks. Decimal coded quantum particle swarm optimization (DQPSO) in [235] is
used to solve the feeder reconfiguration problem with different model of DGs in order to minimize the active
power losses. The authors in [89], proposed a new method based on adaptive particle swarm optimization
(APSO) for investigating the multi-objective stochastic distribution feeder reconfiguration problem. Also in this
paper, various sources of uncertainties including output of the wind power generators and load demands are
handled through an effective probabilistic power flow method based on point estimation method (PEM) scheme.

E) Ant Colony System Algorithm (ACSA).

In 1990s, Dorigo et al. [236] introduced Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) as a new technique for solving
combinatorial optimization problems. It is inspired from an movement to find food. ACO is derived from ant
system (AS) algorithm which has the best performance in engineering applications [237-240]. In [241], ACO is
used as to determine optimal location and size of DGs to minimize investment and operational costs of the
system considering DGs as constant power sources. Authors in [242] have used ant colony system algorithm
(ACSA) to seek out the optimal re-closer and DG placement for radial distribution network by using the
composite reliability index as the objective function in the optimization procedure. Kaur et al. [243] have used
ACSA to solve capacitor allocation problem in radial distribution systems to minimize the total cost of losses. In
[244], multi-objective reconfiguration problem which considers the active power losses minimization and the
energy not supplied index which is solved by a modified ACO.

F) Artificial Bee Colony (ABC)

ABC algorithm was introduced by Dervis Karaboga in 2005 [245]. This method inspired by intelligent behavior
[245]. ABC approach is applied in [246] to solve distribution network
expansion planning to obtain the optimum value of reinforcements and to find a suitable commitment schedule
for the installation of new DGs. In [247], the authors have used ABC algorithm for DG planning problem in
order to reduce the power losses and to improve the voltage profile in the radial distribution systems. Also, in
[248], optimal DG location and size problem has been solved by ABC algorithm in order to minimize the power
losses and enhance the voltage stability level. ABC have been used in [249] to find the optimal location and size
of DGs with two control parameters (colony size and maximum iteration number) to be tuned.

G) Artificial Immune System (AIS)

Artificial immune algorithm (AIS) is used in [250] to generate a set of nearly-optimal solutions under load-
evolution conditions (including the load for each node, and a unique expected mean energy tax). The authors in
[251] have used AIS to solve DG placement problem in order to minimize the power losses taking into account
the bus voltage and line current limits. In [252], AIS is used to solve the DG planning problem considering
uncertainty in the load demands in distribution networks.
H) Bacterial Foraging Optimization Algorithm (BFOA
In 2002, Passino invented Bacterial Foraging Optimization algorithm (BFOA). This algorithm tried to model the
single and set behavior of E. Coli bacteria (kind of bacteria that live in intestines in order to find a simple path
for faster convergence [253]. In [254], BFOA is used to solve the optimal radial feeder routing in the
distribution systems planning problem. Devi and Geethanjali, [255] have modified the performance of the BFO
algorithm (MBFO) in order to find the optimal placement and sizing of DGs in a distribution system to reduce
the total power losses and to improve the voltage profile of the distribution system. The result showed that
MBFOA is more efficient in finding the minimum cost in less computational time than BFOA. . In [256], BFOA
was applied to find the optimal size of capacitor banks in order to minimize the power losses by taking into
account loss sensitivity factor (LSF) and voltage stability index (VSI). BFOA is presented to find the optimal
size and location of multiple DGs in order to minimize the network losses, operational costs and improve the
voltage stability of a radial distribution system [257].

I) Bat Algorithm (BA)

Bat Algorithm (BA) was presented by Yang in 2010 as a base on the echolocation behavior of bats [258].
Yammani et al. [259] have used BA to find the optimal location and sizing of DGs to minimize the network
losses and improve the voltage profile. In [30], BA is used to determine optimal location of capacitors in radial
distribution system in order to minimize the power losses and maximize the revenue. In [260], BA was used to
obtain the optimal placement, size and the number of DGs in radial distribution network. In [261], BA and loss
sensitivity factor (LSF) are respectively used to find the optimal size of the capacitor banks and find the optimal
site of the capacitor.

J) Imperialist Competitive Algorithm (ICA)

ICA is a new approach inspired by imperialists competition and the first using was in 2007 by Atashpaz and
Lucas [262]. In [263] ICA is used to find the optimal placement and size of DGs to minimize the network power
losses. Moradi et.al [264] have used ICA to find optimal sitting and sizing of DGs and capacitor banks in a
distribution network. The objective is to reduce the power losses, increase voltage stability index and improve
the system voltage profile. In [265], the optimization problem of DGs at any load level is solved by using ICA
in order to reduce the power losses and enhance the voltage stability.

K) Cuckoo Search Algorithm (CSA)

CSA is a new approach developed by Yang and Deb in 2009 to solve the optimization problems [266]. This
algorithm is inspired from the obligate brood parasitism behavior of certain species of cuckoos by laying their
eggs in the nests of other birds of other species. Nguyen et al. [267] have proposed CSA to find the optimum
placement and size of DGs to minimize the power losses and voltage stability deviation index. Also, in [268],
CSA is used for optimal DG placement to reduce the power losses and improve voltage profile of the
distribution power system. In [269], COA is used to reduce the power losses and improve the voltage profile for
two types of DGs: biomass and solar-thermal. The authors in [270] have applied CSA to obtain optimal location
and size of DGs in distribution network to minimize the active power losses and improve the voltage profile by
maintaining the fault level and line load within an acceptable limit.
L) Intelligent Water Drop (IWP) Algorithm
Intelligent water drop (IWD) was firstly proposed as a new approach to find the global optimum solutions by
Shah-Hosseini in 2007. This algorithm inspired from the river procedure to find an optimal path to flow from
source to destination [271]. In [272], IWP algorithm is used to find the optimal sizing of DGs in radial
distribution networks in order to minimize the losses and to improve the voltage profile. In [273] (IWD) is
proposed to find the optimal size and site of DGs in micro grids to minimize network power losses, improve
voltage regulation and increase the voltage stability.

M) Fuzzy Set Theory (FST)

Fuzzy set theory (FST) was introduced in 1965 by Zadeh [97] as formal tools to deal with data that have non-
statistical uncertainties. A fuzzy variable is modeled by a membership function which operates over the range of
real numbers zero or one. Momoh et al. [274] have confirmed that FST is widely used in power system
planning. In [275] fuzzy-GA is used to solve optimal DG placement problem by transforming the objective
function and constraint into multi-objective function with fuzzy set. In [276], FST is used for the modeling of
the load and electricity price uncertainties in the system and solved by NSGA-II in order to minimize the
operational cost, technical and economic risks. The authors in [277] have applied two-stage algorithm to solve
ODGP problem with voltage and line loading constraints in order to minimize the system losses. In the first
stage, fuzzy approach is used to optimal DG locations while in the second stage, PSO is used to find the size of
the DGs. Also In [278], Fuzzy Logic is used to find the optimal capacitor locations and BA is applied to
determine size of optimal capacitors in order to reduce the power losses.
Table 5 presents a summary of literature review for optimal DGs placement problem using intelligent
techniques.

4.4.3 The Prospective Methods

The main perspective revealed methods are presented as follows:

A) Firefly Algorithm (FA):

This algorithm was first introduced in 2009 by Yang [279] for solving nonlinear multidimensional optimization
problems. FA is inspired from the natural behavior of the fireflies; a firefly of the maximum brightness has the
largest ability to attract other fireflies regardless to their sex. References [280, 281] have used FA to find the
optimal site and size of multiple DGs on a balanced radial feeder for power loss minimization. Othman et al.
[282] have modified the traditional FA in order to be able to deal with the practically constrained optimization
problems. This new algorithm has many advantages such as, simple concepts, easy implementation and higher
stability mechanism compare with traditional FA [282].
B) Shuffled Frog Leaping Algorithm (SFLA):
This method is formed by mimetic evolution of a group of frogs when searching for an area, where the
maximum amount of food available [283]. Optimal site and size of DGs considering system loss minimization
and voltage profile improvement as objective functions solved by SFLA [283].

C) Big Bang-Big Crunch (BB-BC) Algorithm:

This algorithm was first introduced in 2006 by Erol and Eksin [284] as a new optimization method. This
algorithm relies on one of the theories of the evolution of the universe which is named the Big Bang and Big
Crunch (BB-BC) Theory. In [285], BB-BC algorithm is used to solve distribution network reconfiguration and
optimal power allocation of DGs in order to minimize the total active power losses, maximize the voltage
stability index, minimize the total cost, and minimize the total emission produce by DGs and the grid.
 Table 5. Summary of literature review for OGDP problem using intelligent techniques
Intelligent searches References Objective function Contribution Uncertainty issue Mathematical
modeling Uncertainty
Simulated Annealing (SA) Nahman, J. M., & Peric, D. M. (2008) Minimize investment cost and loss Optimal planning problem of radial distribution is Not modeled
[202] cost solved by apply SA combination with a steepest
descent approach.
Sutthibun & Bhasaputra (2010) [200] Minimize power loss and emission Multi-objective optimal DG placement problem is Not modeled
solved by SA.
Injeti, S. K., & Kumar, N. P. (2013) Minimize the network power losses SA is proposed to evaluate the optimal siting and Not modeled
[201] and improve the voltage stability. sizing of DGs with unspecified power factor
distribution network.
Evolutionary Algorithms HRA Kim et al. (1998) [207] Minimize power losses Conventional GA and HRA are introduced for Not modeled
(EAs) solving optimal sizing problem in DGs.
Gandomkar et al. (2005) [208] Minimizes the power losses Simple GA and HRA are applied to introduce optimal Not modeled
site and size Of DGs.
GA Silvestri et al. (1999)[206] Maximization of the benefit related Optimal sitting and sizing problem of DG solved by a Not modeled
to DG GA.
Teng, et al. (2002)[211] Maximize benefit /cost ratio of DG GA proposed to find best balance between the costs Not modeled
and benefits of DG placement with optimal types,
locations and sizes in distribution feeders.
Ganguly, S. and D. Samajpati (2015) minimizing the network power loss GA used to present a DG allocation strategy for radial Load, DG fuzzy-based approach
[138] and maximum node voltage distribution networks under uncertainties of load and
deviation generation.
[209] Improve voltage profile and reduce GA is designed to find optimal re-closer positions Not modeled
losses when DGs are connected in a securely optimal
manner.
Borges & Falcao (2006)[3] Minimize the power loss and Used GA to introduce and solve optimal DGP Not modeled
maximize benefit / cost ratio problem model with reliability.
Harrison et al. (2007) [213] Maximize DG capacity, Combined GA and OPF to solve ODGP problem. Not modeled
Harrison et al. (2008) [212] Maximize profit Hybrid method employing GA and OPF to apply Not modeled
optimal placement and size a predefined number of
DGs.
Singh & Verma (2009) [210] Minimize real power loss ODGP model with different load models solved by Not modeled
GA.
El-Ela et al. (2010) [158] Improve the voltage profile, GA used to propose the optimal location and size of Not modeled
increase the spinning reserve, and DG with multi-system constraints to achieve a single
reduce the losses. or multi-objectives.
Talaat & Al-Ammar (2011) [10] Minimum losses of the distribution Optimal penetration level, and optimal locations and Not modeled
system sizes of DGs have been investigated using three GA.
Falaghi et al. (2011) [214] Minimize cost GA and OPF approaches are employed as the solution Not modeled
tool to solve ODGP problem.
Mirhoseini, et al. (2014) [215] Minimize real power losses and GA and ACO together with ICA are proposed to Not modeled
improve voltage profile solve the feeder reconfiguration problem in DGs.
(NSGA) Ochoa et al. (2008) [216] Minimize power losses and short- NSGA is applied in order to find configurations that Demand and Scenario-based
circuit levels. maximize the integration of distributed wind power generation approach
generation.
Ahmadi et al. (2008) [218] Minimize total cost, minimize line NSGA-II algorithm used to find optimal location and Not modeled
 losses and improve voltage profile size of DGs.
Siano, P. and G. Mokryani (2015) maximize the net present value NSGA and the market-based OPF have proposed to Load demand and Scenario-based
[217] associated with the WT investment find the optimal numbers and sizes of WTs. renewable generation approach
over a planning horizon
Carrano et al. (2014) [61] Minimize cost ODGP problem solved by (NSGA-II) with taking Load demand Scenario-based
account monetary cost, reliability and load growth approach
uncertainties.
(NRGA) Wang & Gao (2013) [219] Reduce losses NRGA, GA and BSP are used to solve distribution No modelling
network optimization problem for loss reduction.
Tabu Search (TS) Nara et al. (2001) [221] Reduce distribution power loss ODGP are solved by TS method for the case of Not modeled
uniformly distributed loads with unity power factor.
Golshan & Arefifar (2006)[220] Minimize cost of power and losses DGP problem is solved by using TS method, the Not modeled
and reactive power capacity. amount of DGs and reactive power sources RPSs are
counted in selected buses.
Maciel& Padilha-Feltrin, (2009) [222] Optimal solutions set Apply a Multi-objective TS to find the Pareto optimal Not modeled
solutions set, it is a better performance comparing to
the NSGA-II method.
Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) Krueasuk & Ongsakul, (2006)[226] Minimize the total real power losses ODGP of multi-DGs determine by PSO. Not modeled
Niknam (2006) [228] Summation of electrical energy The optimal operation problem solved by PSO and Not modeled
generated by DGs and substation presents a better performance in comparison with
bus GA.
Beromi et al. (2008) [227] Improve voltage profile, reduce ODGP considering load flow and harmonic Not modeled
loss and reduce THD calculations for decision-making is applied by PSO.
Raj et al. (2008) [230] Reduces line losses, improve Find optimal value of the DG capacity by using PSO Not modeled
voltage profile and improves power method.
quality
Wong et al. (2010) [12] Reduces total power losses PSO and Newton-Raphson load flow method are Not modeled
proposed to determine the optimal location and size
of the DG.
Jain et al. (2011) [231] Minimizing power loss and Multi Objective PSO method proposed to determine Not modeled
improve voltage profile the optimal size of the DG.
Siano, P., & Mokryani, G. (2013) Minimizing energy costs and PSO and market-based OPF are used to choose the Not modeled
[229] power losses optimal size and number of WTs in the system with
considering security constraints and inter-temporal
effects.
Aghaei et al. (2014) [232] Reduce overall cost ,power losses PSO used to solve short time planning problem of Not modeled
and voltage stability index DG.
Zeinalzadeh et al. (2015) [234] Minimize the cost Multi objective PSO method is used to find optimal Load demand Fuzzy-based
location and capacity of DGs and shunt capacitor approach
banks with considering load uncertainty in the
system.
Jamian et al. (2015) [233] Minimize the cost ODGP problem is solved by using rank evolutionary Not modeled
PSO method.
Guan et al. (2015) [235] Minimizing real power loss DQPSO used to solve the feeder reconfiguration Renewable DG Monte-Carlo
problem with different model of DGs. simulation
Malekpour, et al. (2013) [89] Reduces total power losses and A new method based on adaptive particle swarm Renewable DG Point estimation
Minimize cost of power optimization (APSO) is offered for investigating the method (PEM) based
 multi-objective stochastic distribution feeder approach
reconfiguration (SDFR) problem.
Ant Colony Optimization (ACO). Teng & Liu (2003) [239] Minimize the cost ACO is used to solve the optimum switch relocation Not modeled
problem.
Gómez et al. (2004) [238] Minimize the investment and ACO is proposed to solve planning problem of Not modeled
operation costs distribution systems.
Vlachogiannis et al. (2005) [240] Minimize real power losses ACO approach is applied to the solution of the Not modeled
constrained load flow (CLF) problem as a
combinatorial optimization problem.
Falaghi & Haghifam (2007) [241] Minimizing the DG operation and ACO used as the optimization tool to solve optimal Not modeled
investment cost location and size problems in DG.
Wang, L., & Singh, C. (2008) [242] Minimizing a composite reliability ACO is proposed to seek out the optimal re-closer Not modeled
index and minimizing the customer and DG placement.
interruption costs
Kaur, D., & Sharma, J. (2013) [243] Minimize the total cost Multi-period optimization problem solved by ACO. Not modeled
Mirhoseini et al. (2015) [244] Minimizes both real power losses Multi-objective reconfiguration problem consider the Not modeled
and energy not supplied index real power losses and the energy not supplied index
was discussion together by a modified ACO.
Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) Padma Lalitha et al. (2010) [247] Maximum loss reduction ABC algorithm and Fuzzy are used to find the Not modeled
optimal DG locations and sizes in the system.
Abu-Mouti et al. (2011) [249] Minimize the total real power loss ABC used find the optimal site, size and power factor Not modeled
of DGs.
El-Zonkoly (2013) [246] Minimizing cost ABC is applied to solve dynamic expansion planning Not modeled
problem of DGs through discuss unit commitment
(UC) mathematical model and a multistage expansion
planning strategy.
N. Mohandas et al. (2015) [248] Improve voltage profile Optimal DG location and size problems have been Not modeled
solved by ABC algorithm.
Artificial Immune System (AIS) Carrano et al. (2007) [250] Minimizing cost Immune algorithm (IA) used to generate a set of Load demand Monte-Carlo
nearly-optimal under a set of load-evolution simulation
conditions.
Aghaebrahimi et al. (2009) [251] Minimize power losses AIS is used to solve DG placement problem in power Not modeled
network.
Souza et al. (2011) [252] Minimize total costs AIS used to solve the DGP problem by taking Load demand Monte Carlo
account the effect of uncertainty in electric simulation
distribution networks.
Bacterial Foraging Singh et al. (2012) [254] Minimizing cost Bacterial foraging introduce to provide a rapidly Not modeled
solutions with a best probability in order to obtain a
global optimal solution of the distribution planning
problem.
Devi, S., & Geethanjali, M. (2014) Reduce the total loss and improve MBFO is proposed to improve the convergence Not modeled
[255] the voltage profile characteristics of BFO algorithm to solve optimal
problems of radial distribution systems.
Kowsalya, M. (2014) [257] Minimize network power losses BFOA is proposed to solve the various optimization Not modeled
problems at different load levels.
Devabalaji et al. (2015) [256] Minimize power losses BFOA was used to fine optimal size of capacitor Not modeled
bank with taking account both LSF and VSI.
Bat Algorithm Yammani et al. (2013) [259] Minimize system loss and improve BA used to find the optimal location and sizing of Load demand Scenario-based
voltage profile the DGs. approach
Injeti et al. (2015) [30] Loss minimization Optimal Location problem of capacitors in radial Not modeled
DGs is solved by BA and Cuckoo Search (CS).
Candelo-Becerra et al. (2015) [260] Minimizing power losses BA was used to obtain optimal solution of DGs Renewable DG Scenario-based
problem in radial distribution network. approach
Devabalaji et al. (2015) [261]. Reduce the total power loss BAT Algorithm used to find optimal size of the Not modeled
capacitor banks and LSF used to pre- find the optimal
site of the capacitor placement.
Imperialist Competitive Algorithm Mahari et al. (2012) [263] Minimizing the total system active ICA used to find optimal location and size of DGs. Not modeled
(ICA) power losses
Moradi et al. (2014) [264]. Reduce power loss , increase ICA employed to solve the ODGP problem of DG Not modeled
voltage stability index and and capacitor banks in the distribution network.
improving system voltage profile
Poornazaryan et al. (2016) [265]. Reduce power losses and enhance Optimal location and size of DG unit are obtained by Load demand Scenario-based
voltage stability. proposed ICA with considering load variations. approach
Cuckoo Search Algorithm Fard et al. (2012) [269]. Reduce the losses and improve the CSA introduce to solve ODGP problem for different Load demand Monte Carlo method
(CSA) voltage profile types of DG in the network.
Moravej et al. (2013) [268]. Minimize real power losses and Optimal location and size problem is solved by Not modeled
improve voltage profile employing CSA.
Buaklee et al. (2013) [270]. Loss reduction and improve voltage CSA is proposed to find optimal site and size of DGs Not modeled
profile by considering the fault level constraints.
Nguyen et al. (2016) [267] Minimize total power loss and CSA employ to solve optimal location and size Not modeled
enhance voltage stability. problems in DGs network.
Intelligent Water Drop (IWP) Algorithm Prabha et al. (2015) [272]. Minimize the losses IWD used to find optimal sizing and the loss Not modeled
sensitivity factor (LSF) for the installation of DGs in
the radial distribution network.
Moradi et al. (2016) [273] Minimize network power losses, IWD method with GA is proposed to find size and Not modeled
improve voltage regulation and site of DG in micro grids.
increase the voltage stability.
Fuzzy Set Theory (FST) Kim et al. (2002) [275] Reduce power loss costs Fuzzy-GA method used to solve the ODGP problem Not modeled
by transforming the objective function and constraints
it to multi-objective function with fuzzy sets

Haghifam et al. (2008) [276] Minimization of total cost , Load and electricity price uncertainties in the system Load demand Fuzzy numbers
technical and economic risk are modelled using fuzzy numbers and solve by non-
dominant sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-II).

Lalitha et al. (2010) [277] Reduce power losses and improve Fuzzy and PSO algorithm including voltage and line Not modeled
the voltage profile loading constraints proposed to find the optimal DG
locations and sizes.

Reddy, V. U., & Manoj, A. (2012) Reduce power losses BA used to determine the size of optimal capacitors Not modeled
[278] in DGs.
The above table shows that the trend of using the intelligent methods has been gradually increased to find the
optimum solution in DGs placement problem. In addition, the scientists have recently applied two or three
methods as a combination to obtain a new strategies in order to solve the optimization of DGP problem
efficiently, such as [12, 207, 208, 212-215, 219, 247, 273, 275-277].

Tables 6 and 7 show the summary of the conventional and intelligent methods characteristics.
 Table 6. Advantages and disadvantages of conventional methods
Conventional methods References Advantages Disadvantages

Linear programming (LP) [156-158] Easy to implement, and it accommodates large variety of Used just when the objective function is linear.
power system operating constraints
Nonlinear programming (NLP) [162, 163] Simple and Efficient. Long time to run.
Mixed-integer nonlinear programming [165-172, 286] It is fast, robust, efficient and deal with very large scale It may insert errors due to the linearization of the
(MINLP) DGP problems. nonlinear characteristics of DGP.
Dynamic programming (DP) [173-176, 286] Efficient and easy. Not suitable for large-scale DGP problems
Optimal Power Flow-based Approach [36, 177-184] Easy, simple and efficiency in computational time The results may not be optimal when the problem is
(OPFA) highly complex and Hard to understand and implement
Direct approach [185-187] Robust, very efficient and suitable for large-scale Not deals with the radial network structure.
distribution systems
Ordinal optimization (OO) [188-190] It is deal with non-deterministic polynomial (NP) Need long time.
complete problems such as DG planning with discrete and
continuous variables.
Analytical approaches (AA) [15, 191-196] Simple, easy implementation and efficiency in Only obtains approximate solution.
computational time.
Continuation power flow (CPP) [197, 198] Faster, Very efficient, robust, qualified to treat different May not find the optimal solution.
level penetration of DG.

Table 7. Summary of Evaluation Intelligent Methods

Intelligent methods References Advantages Disadvantages
Simulated Annealing (SA) [200-202] Ease of implementation, get best solutions and robust. It requires excessive computation time.
Evolutionary Algorithms (EAs) [206-208] Simple, speedy processing time , efficient and accurate Used a larger population size, repeated fitness function
results, very useful for complex problems evaluation for large and complex problems may be time
consuming.
Tabu Search (TS) [220, 221] It is an efficient to achieve near -optimal solution within a Need considerable parameters to be define
reasonably short duration.
Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) [12, 226-232, It is easy to implement Insensitive to scaling of design Need to solid mathematical background.
287, 288] variables, Simple implementation, easily parallelized for
concurrent processing, derivative free, Very few
algorithm parameters, and very efficient global search
algorithm.
Ant Colony System Algorithm (ACSA). [238-244] Easy to understand and code Rapid discovery of good Theoretical analysis is difficult
solutions
Artificial bee colony (ABC) [245-249, 289, Very simple, robust, efficient algorithm, fast-converging, The performance of this method may be influenced
290] capable of handling complex optimization problems and it depending on the constraint handling method used
does not require external parameters.
Artificial immune system (AIS) [250-252] Effective, can find and maintain set of suboptimal Complex system
solutions simultaneously with the existing better solution.
Bacterial foraging [254-257] Efficiency to find result in less computational time It requires the tuning of great number of parameters.
Biologically inspired algorithm (Bat [30, 259-261, Efficient and Accurate. The convergence rate is very much influenced by
Algorithm) 278] adjustment parameters.
 Imperialist Competitive Algorithm [263-265]. effective, fast, and capable of handling complex nonlinear harder to code
(ICA) mix-integer optimization problems in DGs. fewer literature example
Cuckoo Search Algorithm [266, 268-270] It is more generic and robust, efficient, easy to code, less Slow convergence.
(CSA) parameters setting.
Intelligent Water Drop (IWP) Algorithm [271, 272] fast, efficient, easy to implement and need less iteration fewer literature example
to find good results
Fuzzy Set Theory (FST) [275-277] Easy to comprehend, and suitable to model uncertainties fewer literature example
to find better solution
5. Conclusion
Distributed generators (DGs) are reliable solution to provide power which accommodate the load increase and
relieve network overload in addition to offer technical and economic benefit.
This paper reviews a number of studies which already been carried out to develop an efficient and robust
optimization algorithms to solve DGs placement problem (size, site and the type). The sequence of this study
has considered a comprehensive review of uncertainty modeling in power system and application of these
methods in DGs planning and operation problems. Also, the conventional, intelligent and perspective
approaches used for the DGs problem are specifically reviewed. Then, the comparison between these methods
has been shown to locate the advantage and disadvantage.
This work is specialized by incorporating the reviewing of the methods which recently used as solution of DGs
placement problem and characterized as simple concepts, easy implementation and higher stability mechanism.
The recent review depicts that the intelligent methods are mostly used to obtain an optimum solution of DGs
placement problem. Also shows the new ways of combining more than one method to gain the proposed
optimum solution.

Acknowledgement

This work was supported in part by the SITARA project funded by the British Council and the Department for
Business, Innovation and Skills, UK and in part by the University of Bradford, UK under the CCIP grant
66052/000000.

References

1. Ackermann, T., G. Andersson, and L. Söder, Distributed generation: a definition. Electric power
systems research, 2001. 57(3): p. 195-204.
2. Gonzalez-Longatt, F. and C. Fortoul. Review of Distributed Generation Concept: Attempt of
Unification. in International Conference on Renewable Energies and Power Quality (ICREPQ 05),
España. 2005.
3. Borges, C.L. and D.M. Falcao, Optimal distributed generation allocation for reliability, losses, and
voltage improvement. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2006. 28(6): p. 413-
420.
4. Rawson, M., Distributed generation costs and benefits issue paper. California Energy Commission
(CEC), 2004.
5. El-Khattam, W., et al., Optimal investment planning for distributed generation in a competitive
electricity market. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2004. 19(3): p. 1674-1684.
6. Cardell, J. and R. Tabors, Operation and control in a competitive market: distributed generation in a
restructured industry. The Energy Journal, 1997: p. 111-136.
7. Dondi, P., et al., Network integration of distributed power generation. Journal of Power Sources, 2002.
106(1): p. 1-9.
8. Chambers, A., B. Schnoor, and S. Hamilton, Distributed generation: a nontechnical guide. 2001:
PennWell Books.
9. Ghosh, S., S. Ghoshal, and S. Ghosh, Optimal sizing and placement of distributed generation in a
network system. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2010. 32(8): p. 849-856.
10. Talaat, H.E. and E. Al-Ammar. Optimal allocation and sizing of Distributed Generation in distribution
networks using Genetic Algorithms. in Electrical Power Quality and Utilisation (EPQU), 2011 11th
International Conference on. 2011. IEEE.
11. Payasi, R.P., A.K. Singh, and D. Singh, Review of distributed generation planning: objectives,
constraints, and algorithms. International journal of engineering, science and technology, 2011. 3(3).
12. Wong, L., et al. Distributed generation installation using particle swarm optimization. in Power
Engineering and Optimization Conference (PEOCO), 2010 4th International. 2010. IEEE.
13. Abd-el-Motaleb, A. and S.K. Bekdach, Optimal sizing of distributed generation considering
uncertainties in a hybrid power system. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems,
2016. 82: p. 179-188.
14. Manditereza, P.T. and R. Bansal, Renewable distributed generation: The hidden challenges A review
from the protection perspective. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2016. 58: p. 1457-1465.
15. Gözel, T. and M.H. Hocaoglu, An analytical method for the sizing and siting of distributed generators
in radial systems. Electric Power Systems Research, 2009. 79(6): p. 912-918.
16. Tan, W.-S., et al., Optimal distributed renewable generation planning: A review of different
approaches. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2013. 18: p. 626-645.
17. Jordehi, A.R., Allocation of distributed generation units in electric power systems: A review.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2016. 56: p. 893-905.
18. Prakash, P. and D.K. Khatod, Optimal sizing and siting techniques for distributed generation in
distribution systems: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2016. 57: p. 111-130.
19. Viral, R. and D. Khatod, Optimal planning of distributed generation systems in distribution system: A
review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2012. 16(7): p. 5146-5165.
20. Soroudi, A. and T. Amraee, Decision making under uncertainty in energy systems: state of the art.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2013. 28: p. 376-384.
21. Aien, M., A. Hajebrahimi, and M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad, A comprehensive review on uncertainty modeling
techniques in power system studies. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2016. 57: p. 1077-
1089.
22. Paliwal, P., N. Patidar, and R. Nema, Planning of grid integrated distributed generators: A review of
technology, objectives and techniques. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2014. 40: p. 557-
570.
23. Rahman, H.A., et al., Operation and control strategies of integrated distributed energy resources: A
review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2015. 51: p. 1412-1420.
24. Colmenar-Santos, A., et al., Distributed generation: A review of factors that can contribute most to
achieve a scenario of DG units embedded in the new distribution networks. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews, 2016. 59: p. 1130-1148.
25. Poullikkas, A., Implementation of distributed generation technologies in isolated power systems.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2007. 11(1): p. 30-56.
26. Akorede, M.F., H. Hizam, and E. Pouresmaeil, Distributed energy resources and benefits to the
environment. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2010. 14(2): p. 724-734.
27. Toledo, O.M., D. Oliveira Filho, and A.S.A.C. Diniz, Distributed photovoltaic generation and energy
storage systems: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2010. 14(1): p. 506-511.
28. El-Khattam, W. and M. Salama, Distributed generation technologies, definitions and benefits. Electric
power systems research, 2004. 71(2): p. 119-128.
29. Bayod-Rujula, A.A., Future development of the electricity systems with distributed generation. Energy,
2009. 34(3): p. 377-383.
30. Injeti, S.K., V.K. Thunuguntla, and M. Shareef, Optimal allocation of capacitor banks in radial
distribution systems for minimization of real power loss and maximization of network savings using
bio-inspired optimization algorithms. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems,
2015. 69: p. 441-455.
31. Meena, R.S. and Y. Kumar, A Comparative analysis of Sizing and Siting of Distributed Generation
Using Evolutionary Techniques. International Journal of Electrical, Electronics and Computer
Engineering, 2014. 3(2): p. 73.
32. Allan, G., et al., The economics of distributed energy generation: A literature review. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2015. 42: p. 543-556.
33. Zahedi, A., A review of drivers, benefits, and challenges in integrating renewable energy sources into
electricity grid. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2011. 15(9): p. 4775-4779.
34. Lopes, J.P., et al., Integrating distributed generation into electric power systems: A review of drivers,
challenges and opportunities. Electric power systems research, 2007. 77(9): p. 1189-1203.
35. Ofgem, N., Electricity Distribution Price Control Review, Final Proposals. Ofgem, London, 2004.
36. Dent, C.J., L.F. Ochoa, and G.P. Harrison, Network distributed generation capacity analysis using
OPF with voltage step constraints. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2010. 25(1): p. 296-304.
37. Masters, C., Voltage rise: the big issue when connecting embedded generation to long 11 kV overhead
lines. Power engineering journal, 2002. 16(1): p. 5-12.
38. Kumar, M., C. Samuel, and A. Jaiswal, AN OVERVIEW OF DISTRIBUTED GENERATION IN
POWER SECTOR.
39. Singh, S.N. Distributed Generation in Power Systems: An Overview and Key Issues. in 24rth Indian
Engineering Congress. 2009.
40. Martins, V.F. and C.L. Borges, Active distribution network integrated planning incorporating
distributed generation and load response uncertainties. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2011.
26(4): p. 2164-2172.
41. Georgilakis, P.S. and N.D. Hatziargyriou, Optimal distributed generation placement in power
distribution networks: models, methods, and future research. Power systems, IEEE transactions on,
2013. 28(3): p. 3420-3428.
42. Mohseni-Bonab, S.M., et al., A two-point estimate method for uncertainty modeling in multi-objective
optimal reactive power dispatch problem. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems,
2016. 75: p. 194-204.
43. Soyster, A.L., Technical note convex programming with set-inclusive constraints and applications to
inexact linear programming. Operations research, 1973. 21(5): p. 1154-1157.
44. Lorca, A. and X.A. Sun, Adaptive robust optimization with dynamic uncertainty sets for multi-period
economic dispatch under significant wind. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2015. 30(4): p. 1702-
1713.
45. Fanzeres, B., A. Street, and L.A. Barroso, Contracting strategies for renewable generators: a hybrid
stochastic and robust optimization approach. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2015. 30(4): p.
1825-1837.
46. Hussain, A., V.-H. Bui, and H.-M. Kim, Robust Optimization-Based Scheduling of Multi-Microgrids
Considering Uncertainties. Energies, 2016. 9(4): p. 278.
47. Peng, C., et al., Flexible robust optimization dispatch for hybrid wind/photovoltaic/hydro/thermal
power system. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 2016. 7(2): p. 751-762.
48. -Vazquez, Optimal operation and services scheduling for
an electric vehicle battery swapping station. IEEE transactions on power systems, 2015. 30(2): p. 901-
910.
49. Chen, K., et al., Robust restoration decision-making model for distribution networks based on
information gap decision theory. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 2015. 6(2): p. 587-597.
50. Soroudi, A., P. Siano, and A. Keane, Optimal DR and ESS scheduling for distribution losses payments
minimization under electricity price uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 2016. 7(1): p. 261-
272.
51. Moore, R.E., R.B. Kearfott, and M.J. Cloud, Introduction to Interval Analysis. 2009: Society for
Industrial and Applied Mathematics. 235.
52. Chaturvedi, A., K. Prasad, and R. Ranjan, Use of interval arithmetic to incorporate the uncertainty of
load demand for radial distribution system analysis. IEEE transactions on power delivery, 2006. 21(2):
p. 1019-1021.
53. Noghabi, A.S., H.R. Mashhadi, and J. Sadeh, Optimal coordination of directional overcurrent relays
considering different network topologies using interval linear programming. IEEE Transactions on
Power Delivery, 2010. 25(3): p. 1348-1354.
54. Zhang, P., W. Li, and S. Wang, Reliability-oriented distribution network reconfiguration considering
uncertainties of data by interval analysis. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems,
2012. 34(1): p. 138-144.
55. Das, B., Radial distribution system power flow using interval arithmetic. International Journal of
Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2002. 24(10): p. 827-836.
56. Dantzig, G.B., Linear programming under uncertainty. Management science, 1955. 1(3-4): p. 197-206.
57. Degeilh, Y. and G. Gross, Stochastic simulation of power systems with integrated intermittent
renewable resources. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2015. 64: p. 542-
550.
58. El-Khattam, W., Y. Hegazy, and M. Salama, Investigating distributed generation systems performance
using Monte Carlo simulation. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2006. 21(2): p. 524-532.
59. Zio, E., et al., Monte Carlo simulation-based probabilistic assessment of DG penetration in medium
voltage distribution networks. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2015. 64: p.
852-860.
60. Soroudi, A., et al., Probabilistic dynamic multi-objective model for renewable and non-renewable
distributed generation planning. IET Generation Transmission and Distribution, 2011. 5(11): p. 1173.
61. Carrano, E.G., et al., A multiobjective hybrid evolutionary algorithm for robust design of distribution
networks. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2014. 63: p. 645-656.
62. Mokryani, G., A. Majumdar, and B.C. Pal, Probabilistic method for the operation of three-phase
unbalanced active distribution networks. IET Renewable Power Generation, 10(7) 2016.
63. Mokryani, G., P. Siano, and A. Piccolo. Combined Monte Carlo Simulation and OPF to evaluate the
market impact of wind energy. in Power Generation, Transmission, Distribution and Energy
Conversion (MEDPOWER 2012), 8th Mediterranean Conference on. 2012. IET.
64. Liu, Z., F. Wen, and G. Ledwich, Optimal siting and sizing of distributed generators in distribution
systems considering uncertainties. IEEE Transactions on power delivery, 2011. 26(4): p. 2541-2551.
65. Kantas, N., et al., An overview of sequential Monte Carlo methods for parameter estimation in general
state-space models. IFAC Proceedings Volumes, 2009. 42(10): p. 774-785.
66. Conti, S. and S.A. Rizzo, Monte carlo simulation by using a systematic approach to assess distribution
system reliability considering intentional islanding. IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, 2015.
30(1): p. 64-73.
67. Lopes, V.S. and C.L. Borges, Impact of the combined integration of wind generation and small
hydropower plants on the system reliability. IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, 2015. 6(3): p.
1169-1177.
68. Li, G., et al., Risk analysis for distribution systems in the northeast US under wind storms. IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, 2014. 29(2): p. 889-898.
69. Arabali, A., et al., Stochastic performance assessment and sizing for a hybrid power system of
solar/wind/energy storage. IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, 2014. 5(2): p. 363-371.
70. Han, X., et al., Four-dimensional wind speed model for adequacy assessment of power systems with
wind farms. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2013. 28(3): p. 2978-2985.
71. Mello, J., M. Pereira, and A.L. da Silva, Evaluation of reliability worth in composite systems based on
pseudo-sequential Monte Carlo simulation. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 1994. 9(3): p. 1318-
1326.
72. Zhao, Q., et al., Evaluation of nodal reliability risk in a deregulated power system with photovoltaic
power penetration. IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution, 2014. 8(3): p. 421-430.
73. Celli, G., et al., Reliability assessment in smart distribution networks. Electric Power Systems
Research, 2013. 104: p. 164-175.
74. Da Silva, A.L., et al., Pseudo-chronological simulation for composite reliability analysis with time
varying loads. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2000. 15(1): p. 73-80.
75. Amaral, T.S., C.L. Borges, and A.M. Rei, Composite system well-being evaluation based on non-
sequential Monte Carlo simulation. Electric Power Systems Research, 2010. 80(1): p. 37-45.
76. Bakkiyaraj, R.A. and N. Kumarappan. Evaluation of composite reliability indices based on non-
sequential Monte Carlo simulation and particle swarm optimization. in IEEE Congress on
Evolutionary Computation. 2010. IEEE.
77. De Resende, L. and V. Miranda, Well-being analysis for composite generation and transmission
systems based on pattern recognition techniques. IET generation, transmission & distribution, 2008.
2(2): p. 202-208.
78. Vallée, F., et al., Non-sequential Monte Carlo simulation tool in order to minimize gaseous pollutants
emissions in presence of fluctuating wind power. Renewable energy, 2013. 50: p. 317-324.
79. Zhang, S., G. Li, and M. Zhou. Calculation and analysis of capacity credit of wind farms based on
Monte-Carlo simulation. in IEEE PES General Meeting. 2010. IEEE.
80. Allan, R. and M. Al-Shakarchi, Probabilistic ac load flow. Electrical Engineers, Proceedings of the
Institution of, 1976. 123(6): p. 531-536.
81. Allan, R., A. Da Silva, and R. Burchett, Evaluation methods and accuracy in probabilistic load flow
solutions. IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems, 1981. 5(PAS-100): p. 2539-2546.
82. Schellenberg, A., W. Rosehart, and J. Aguado, Cumulant-based probabilistic optimal power flow (P-
OPF) with Gaussian and gamma distributions. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2005. 20(2): p.
773-781.
83. Dadkhah, M. and B. Venkatesh, Cumulant based stochastic reactive power planning method for
distribution systems with wind generators. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2012. 27(4): p. 2351-
2359.
84. El-Ela, A. Fast and accurate technique for power system state estimation. in IEE Proceedings C-
Generation, Transmission and Distribution. 1992. IET.
85. Dhople, S.V. and A.D. Dominguez-Garcia, A parametric uncertainty analysis method for Markov
reliability and reward models. IEEE Transactions on Reliability, 2012. 61(3): p. 634-648.
86. Su, C.-L. Transfer capability uncertainty computation. in Power System Technology, 2004. PowerCon
2004. 2004 International Conference on. 2004. IEEE.
87. Wan, C., et al. Probabilistic load flow computation using first-order second-moment method. in 2012
IEEE Power and Energy Society General Meeting. 2012. IEEE.
88. Li, X., Y. Li, and S. Zhang, Analysis of probabilistic optimal power flow taking account of the
variation of load power. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2008. 23(3): p. 992-999.
89. Malekpour, A.R., et al., Multi-objective stochastic distribution feeder reconfiguration in systems with
wind power generators and fuel cells using the point estimate method. IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, 2013. 28(2): p. 1483-1492.
90. Qiao, S., et al., Maximizing profit of a wind genco considering geographical diversity of wind farms.
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2015. 30(5): p. 2207-2215.
91. Arabali, A., et al., Genetic-algorithm-based optimization approach for energy management. IEEE
Transactions on Power Delivery, 2013. 28(1): p. 162-170.
92. Soroudi, A., et al., Hybrid immune-genetic algorithm method for benefit maximisation of distribution
network operators and distributed generation owners in a deregulated environment. IET generation,
transmission & distribution, 2011. 5(9): p. 961-972.
93. Baziar, A. and A. Kavousi-Fard, Considering uncertainty in the optimal energy management of
renewable micro-grids including storage devices. Renewable Energy, 2013. 59: p. 158-166.
94. Aien, M., M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad, and F. Aminifar, Probabilistic load flow in correlated uncertain
environment using unscented transformation. IEEE Transactions on Power systems, 2012. 27(4): p.
2233-2241.
95. Caro, E. and G. Valverde, Impact of transformer correlations in state estimation using the unscented
transformation. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2014. 1(29): p. 368-376.
96. Wang, S., W. Gao, and A.S. Meliopoulos, An alternative method for power system dynamic state
estimation based on unscented transform. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2012. 27(2): p. 942-
950.
97. Zadeh, L.A., Fuzzy sets. Information and control, 1965. 8(3): p. 338-353.
98. Soroudi, A., et al., Possibilistic evaluation of distributed generations impacts on distribution networks.
IEEE Transactions on power systems, 2011. 26(4): p. 2293-2301.
99. Bie, Z., et al. Adequacy evaluation of generating system recognizing random fuzzy wind speed. in 2013
IEEE PES Asia-Pacific Power and Energy Engineering Conference (APPEEC). 2013. IEEE.
100. Ramirez-Rosado, I.J. and J.A. Domínguez-Navarro, Possibilistic model based on fuzzy sets for the
multiobjective optimal planning of electric power distribution networks. IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, 2004. 19(4): p. 1801-1810.
101. Romero, A., H. Zini, and G. Rattá, Modelling input parameter interactions in the possibilistic
harmonic load flow. IET generation, transmission & distribution, 2012. 6(6): p. 528-538.
102. Aien, M., M. Rashidinejad, and M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad, On possibilistic and probabilistic uncertainty
assessment of power flow problem: A review and a new approach. Renewable and Sustainable Energy
Reviews, 2014. 37: p. 883-895.
103. Soroudi, A. and M. Ehsan, A possibilistic probabilistic tool for evaluating the impact of stochastic
renewable and controllable power generation on energy losses in distribution networks a case study.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2011. 15(1): p. 794-800.
104. Soroudi, A., Possibilistic-scenario model for DG impact assessment on distribution networks in an
uncertain environment. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2012. 27(3): p. 1283-1293.
105. Ben-Haim, Y., Info-gap decision theory: decisions under severe uncertainty. 2006: Academic Press.
106. Rabiee, A., A. Soroudi, and A. Keane, Information gap decision theory based OPF with HVDC
connected wind farms. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2015. 30(6): p. 3396-3406.
107. Soroudi, A. and M. Ehsan, IGDT based robust decision making tool for DNOs in load procurement
under severe uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Smart Grid, 2013. 4(2): p. 886-895.
108. Murphy, C., A. Soroudi, and A. Keane, Information gap decision theory-based congestion and voltage
management in the presence of uncertain wind power. IEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy, 2016.
7(2): p. 841-849.
109. Soroudi, A., et al., Possibilistic evaluation of distributed generations impacts on distribution networks.
Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2011. 26(4): p. 2293-2301.
110. Bertoldi, O., L. Salvaderi, and S. Scalcino, Monte Carlo approach in planning studies: an application
to IEEE RTS. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 1988. 3(3): p. 1146-1154.
111. Bakkiyaraj, R.A. and N. Kumarappan, Reliability Evaluation of Composite Electric Power System
Based On Latin Hypercube Sampling. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology,
International Journal of Electrical, Computer, Energetic, Electronic and Communication Engineering.
7(4): p. 459-464.
112. Chowdhury, A., S.K. Agarwal, and D.O. Koval, Reliability modeling of distributed generation in
conventional distribution systems planning and analysis. IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications,
2003. 39(5): p. 1493-1498.
113. Kavousi-Fard, A., T. Niknam, and M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad, Stochastic reconfiguration and optimal
coordination of V2G plug-in electric vehicles considering correlated wind power generation. IEEE
Transactions on Sustainable Energy, 2015. 6(3): p. 822-830.
114. Shareef, H., et al., Power quality and reliability enhancement in distribution systems via optimum
network reconfiguration by using quantum firefly algorithm. International Journal of Electrical Power
& Energy Systems, 2014. 58: p. 160-169.
115. Gupta, N., A. Swarnkar, and K. Niazi, Distribution network reconfiguration for power quality and
reliability improvement using Genetic Algorithms. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy
Systems, 2014. 54: p. 664-671.
116. Brown, R.E. Network reconfiguration for improving reliability in distribution systems. in Power
Engineering Society General Meeting, 2003, IEEE. 2003. IEEE.
117. Arya, R., et al., Reliability enhancement of a radial distribution system using coordinated aggregation
based particle swarm optimization considering customer and energy based indices. Applied Soft
Computing, 2012. 12(11): p. 3325-3331.
118. Duan, D.-L., et al., Reconfiguration of distribution network for loss reduction and reliability
improvement based on an enhanced genetic algorithm. International Journal of Electrical Power &
Energy Systems, 2015. 64: p. 88-95.
119. Lotero, R.C. and J. Contreras, Distribution system planning with reliability. IEEE Transactions on
Power Delivery, 2011. 26(4): p. 2552-2562.
120. Billinton, R. and J.E. Billinton, Distribution system reliability indices. IEEE Trans. Power Del.;(United
States), 1989. 4(1).
121. Muñoz-Delgado, G., J. Contreras, and J.M. Arroyo, Multistage Generation and Network Expansion
Planning in Distribution Systems Considering Uncertainty and Reliability.
122. Celli, G., et al., A multiobjective evolutionary algorithm for the sizing and siting of distributed
generation. IEEE Transactions on power systems, 2005. 20(2): p. 750-757.
123. Shaaban, M.F., Y.M. Atwa, and E.F. El-Saadany, DG allocation for benefit maximization in
distribution networks. IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, 2013. 28(2): p. 639-649.
124. Zadsar, M., M. Haghifam, and M. Bandei. Reliability evaluation of the power distribution network
under penetration of wind power considering the uncertainty of wind. in Electrical Power Distribution
Networks Conference (EPDC), 2015 20th Conference on. 2015. IEEE.
125. Allahnoori, M., et al., Reliability assessment of distribution systems in presence of microgrids
considering uncertainty in generation and load demand. Journal of Operation and Automation in
Power Engineering, 2014. 2(2): p. 113-120.
126. Dobakhshari, A.S. and M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad, A reliability model of large wind farms for power system
adequacy studies. IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion, 2009. 24(3): p. 792-801.
127. Shalash, N.A. and A.Z. Ahmad, FUZZY NUMBERS BASED ON ENERGY INDICATORS OF
RELIABILITY POWER SYSTEM.
128. Saraiva, J.T., V. Miranda, and L. Pinto. Generation/transmission power system reliability evaluation by
Monte Carlo simulation assuming a fuzzy load description. in Power Industry Computer Application
Conference, 1995. Conference Proceedings., 1995 IEEE. 1995. IEEE.
129. Choi, J., et al. A study on the fuzzy ELDC of composite power system based on probabilistic and fuzzy
set theories. in Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, 2002 IEEE. 2002. IEEE.
130. Kim, J.-O. and C. Singh, Including uncertainty in LOLE calculation using fuzzy set theory. IEEE
transactions on power systems, 2002. 17(1): p. 19-25.
131. Samaan, N. and C. Singh. State evaluation in composite power system reliability using genetic
algorithms guided by fuzzy constraints. in Power System Technology, 2002. Proceedings. PowerCon
2002. International Conference on. 2002. IEEE.
132. Sheng, W., et al. Reliability Evaluation of Distribution System Considering Sequential Characteristics
of Distributed Generation. in MATEC Web of Conferences. 2016. EDP Sciences.
133. Moshari, A., A. Ebrahimi, and M. Fotuhi-Firuzabad, Short-Term Impacts of DR Programs on
Reliability of Wind Integrated Power Systems Considering Demand-Side Uncertainties. IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, 2016. 31(3): p. 2481-2490.
134. Saint-Pierre, A. and P. Mancarella, Active Distribution System Management: A Dual-Horizon
Scheduling Framework for DSO/TSO Interface Under Uncertainty.
135. Milano, F., C.A. Cañizares, and M. Invernizzi, Multiobjective optimization for pricing system security
in electricity markets. IEEE Transactions on power systems, 2003. 18(2): p. 596-604.
136. Hemmati, R., R.-A. Hooshmand, and N. Taheri, Distribution network expansion planning and DG
placement in the presence of uncertainties. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy
Systems, 2015. 73: p. 665-673.
137. Hadian, A., et al. Probabilistic approach for renewable DG placement in distribution systems with
uncertain and time varying loads. in 2009 IEEE Power & Energy Society General Meeting. 2009.
IEEE.
138. Ganguly, S. and D. Samajpati, Distributed generation allocation on radial distribution networks under
uncertainties of load and generation using genetic algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Sustainable
Energy, 2015. 6(3): p. 688-697.
139. Cecati, C., et al., Smart operation of wind turbines and diesel generators according to economic
criteria. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, 2011. 58(10): p. 4514-4525.
140. Mokryani, G. and P. Siano, Combined Monte Carlo simulation and OPF for wind turbines integration
into distribution networks. Electric Power Systems Research, 2013. 103: p. 37-48.
141. Marin, A. and J. Salmeron, Electric capacity expansion under uncertain demand: decomposition
approaches. IEEE transactions on power systems, 1998. 13(2): p. 333-339.
142. Optimal Capacitor Placement In Distribution Networks Regarding
Uncertainty In Active Power Load And DG Units Production. IET Generation, Transmission &
Distribution, 2016.
143. Mokryani, G. and P. Siano, Optimal wind turbines placement within a distribution market environment.
Applied Soft Computing, 2013. 13(10): p. 4038-4046.
144. Mokryani, G. and P. Siano, Strategic placement of distribution network operator owned wind turbines
by using market-based optimal power flow. IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution, 2014. 8(2):
p. 281-289.
145. Khorramdel, B. and M. Raoofat, Optimal stochastic reactive power scheduling in a microgrid
considering voltage droop scheme of DGs and uncertainty of wind farms. Energy, 2012. 45(1): p. 994-
1006.
146. Mokryani, G. and P. Siano, Evaluating the integration of wind power into distribution networks by
using Monte Carlo simulation. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2013. 53:
p. 244-255.
147. Aghaei, J., et al., Scenario-based dynamic economic emission dispatch considering load and wind
power uncertainties. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2013. 47: p. 351-
367.
148. Abdelaziz, A., et al., Optimal allocation of stochastically dependent renewable energy based
distributed generators in unbalanced distribution networks. Electric Power Systems Research, 2015.
119: p. 34-44.
149. Hu, X., Y. Gao, and Y. Zhao. Multi-objective coordinated planning of distribution network frame
incorporating multi-type distributed generation considering uncertainties. in International Conference
on Renewable Power Generation (RPG 2015). 2015. IET.
150. Bertsimas, D. and M. Sim, Robust discrete optimization and network flows. Mathematical
programming, 2003. 98(1-3): p. 49-71.
151. Conejo, A.J., J.M. Morales, and L. Baringo, Real-time demand response model. IEEE Transactions on
Smart Grid, 2010. 1(3): p. 236-242.
152. Mokryani, G., Active distribution networks planning with integration of demand response. Solar
Energy, 2015. 122: p. 1362-1370.
153. Fleten, S.-E., K.M. Maribu, and I. Wangensteen, Optimal investment strategies in decentralized
renewable power generation under uncertainty. Energy, 2007. 32(5): p. 803-815.
154. Koltsaklis, N.E., P. Liu, and M.C. Georgiadis, An integrated stochastic multi-regional long-term
energy planning model incorporating autonomous power systems and demand response. Energy, 2015.
82: p. 865-888.
155. Stott, B. and E. Hobson, Power system security control calculations using linear programming, Part I.
Power Apparatus and Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 1978(5): p. 1713-1720.
156. Keane, A. and M. O'Malley, Optimal allocation of embedded generation on distribution networks.
Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2005. 20(3): p. 1640-1646.
157. Keane, A. and M.O. Malley, Optimal utilization of distribution networks for energy harvesting. Power
Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2007. 22(1): p. 467-475.
158. El-Ela, A.A., S.M. Allam, and M. Shatla, Maximal optimal benefits of distributed generation using
genetic algorithms. Electric Power Systems Research, 2010. 80(7): p. 869-877.
159. James, F.F.W.G.G., F. Luini, and P.M. Look. A two-stage approach to solving large-scale optimal
power flows. in Proceedings of the... International Conference on Power Industry Computer
Applications. 1979. IEEE Service Center.
160. Kermanshahi, B., K. Takahashi, and Y. Zhou. Optimal operation and allocation of reactive power
resource considering static voltage stability. in Power System Technology, 1998. Proceedings.
POWERCON'98. 1998 International Conference on. 1998. IEEE.
161. Van Cutsem, T., A method to compute reactive power margins with respect to voltage collapse. Power
Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 1991. 6(1): p. 145-156.
162. Rau, N.S. and Y.-h. Wan, Optimum location of resources in distributed planning. Power Systems,
IEEE Transactions on, 1994. 9(4): p. 2014-2020.
163. Ghosh, S., S.P. Ghoshal, and S. Ghosh, Optimal sizing and placement of distributed generation in a
network system. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2010. 32(8): p. 849-856.
164. Zhang, W., F. Li, and L.M. Tolbert, Review of reactive power planning: objectives, constraints, and
algorithms. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2007. 22(4): p. 2177-2186.
165. El-Khattam, W., Y. Hegazy, and M. Salama, An integrated distributed generation optimization model
for distribution system planning. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2005. 20(2): p. 1158-1165.
166. Atwa, Y.M. and E.F. El-Saadany, Probabilistic approach for optimal allocation of wind-based
distributed generation in distribution systems. Renewable Power Generation, IET, 2011. 5(1): p. 79-88.
167. Atwa, Y., et al., Optimal renewable resources mix for distribution system energy loss minimization.
Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2010. 25(1): p. 360-370.
168. Porkar, S., et al., Optimal allocation of distributed generation using a two stage multi objective
mixed integer nonlinear programming. European Transactions on Electrical Power, 2011. 21(1): p.
1072-1087.
169. Kumar, A. and W. Gao, Optimal distributed generation location using mixed integer non-linear
programming in hybrid electricity markets. Generation, Transmission & Distribution, IET, 2010. 4(2):
p. 281-298.
170. Al Abri, R., E.F. El-Saadany, and Y.M. Atwa, Optimal placement and sizing method to improve the
voltage stability margin in a distribution system using distributed generation. Power Systems, IEEE
Transactions on, 2013. 28(1): p. 326-334.
171. Capitanescu, F., et al., Assessing the potential of network reconfiguration to improve distributed
generation hosting capacity in active distribution systems. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on,
2015. 30(1): p. 346-356.
172. Franco, J.F., M.J. Rider, and R. Romero, A mixed-integer quadratically-constrained programming
model for the distribution system expansion planning. International Journal of Electrical Power &
Energy Systems, 2014. 62: p. 265-272.
173. Celli, G., et al. Multi-year optimal planning of active distribution networks. in 19th International
Conference on Electricity Distribution. 2007.
174. Graph theory based formulation of multi-period distribution expansion
problems. Electric Power Systems Research, 2010. 80(10): p. 1256-1266.
175. Ganguly, S., N. Sahoo, and D. Das, Multi-objective planning of electrical distribution systems using
dynamic programming. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2013. 46: p. 65-
78.
176. Khalesi, N., N. Rezaei, and M.-R. Haghifam, DG allocation with application of dynamic programming
for loss reduction and reliability improvement. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy
Systems, 2011. 33(2): p. 288-295.
177. Harrison, G. and A. Wallace. Optimal power flow evaluation of distribution network capacity for the
connection of distributed generation. in Generation, Transmission and Distribution, IEE Proceedings-.
2005. IET.
178. Gautam, D. and N. Mithulananthan, Optimal DG placement in deregulated electricity market. Electric
Power Systems Research, 2007. 77(12): p. 1627-1636.
179. Algarni, A.A. and K. Bhattacharya, Disco operation considering DG units and their goodness factors.
Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2009. 24(4): p. 1831-1840.
180. Vovos, P.N. and J.W. Bialek, Direct incorporation of fault level constraints in optimal power flow as a
tool for network capacity analysis. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2005. 20(4): p. 2125-2134.
181. Vovos, P.N., et al., Optimal power flow as a tool for fault level-constrained network capacity analysis.
Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2005. 20(2): p. 734-741.
182. Ochoa, L.F., C.J. Dent, and G.P. Harrison, Distribution network capacity assessment: Variable DG and
active networks. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2010. 25(1): p. 87-95.
183. Ochoa, L.F. and G.P. Harrison, Minimizing energy losses: Optimal accommodation and smart
operation of renewable distributed generation. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2011. 26(1): p.
198-205.
184. Comparison of single-and multiple-distributed generation
concepts in terms of power loss, voltage profile, and line flows under uncertain scenarios. Renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2015. 48: p. 317-327.
185. Samui, A., et al., A direct approach to optimal feeder routing for radial distribution system. Power
Delivery, IEEE Transactions on, 2012. 27(1): p. 253-260.
186. Samui, A., S. Samantaray, and G. Panda, Distribution system planning considering reliable feeder
routing. Generation, Transmission & Distribution, IET, 2012. 6(6): p. 503-514.
187. Raju, M.R., K.R. Murthy, and K. Ravindra, Direct search algorithm for capacitive compensation in
radial distribution systems. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2012. 42(1):
p. 24-30.
188. Jabr, R.A. and B. Pal, Ordinal optimisation approach for locating and sizing of distributed generation.
Generation, Transmission & Distribution, IET, 2009. 3(8): p. 713-723.
189. Lin, X., et al., Distribution network planning integrating charging stations of electric vehicle with
V2G. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2014. 63: p. 507-512.
190. Zou, K., et al., Distribution system planning with incorporating DG reactive capability and system
uncertainties. Sustainable Energy, IEEE Transactions on, 2012. 3(1): p. 112-123.
191. Wang, C. and M.H. Nehrir, Analytical approaches for optimal placement of distributed generation
sources in power systems. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2004. 19(4): p. 2068-2076.
192. Elsaiah, S., M. Benidris, and J. Mitra, Analytical approach for placement and sizing of distributed
generation on distribution systems. Generation, Transmission & Distribution, IET, 2014. 8(6): p. 1039-
1049.
193. Gozel, T., et al. Optimal placement and sizing of distributed generation on radial feeder with different
static load models. in International conference on future power systems. 2005.
194. Mahmoud, K., N. Yorino, and A. Ahmed, Power loss minimization in distribution systems using
multiple distributed generations. IEEJ Transactions on Electrical and Electronic Engineering, 2015.
10(5): p. 521-526.
195. Hung, D.Q., N. Mithulananthan, and R. Bansal, Analytical expressions for DG allocation in primary
distribution networks. Energy Conversion, IEEE Transactions on, 2010. 25(3): p. 814-820.
196. Acharya, N., P. Mahat, and N. Mithulananthan, An analytical approach for DG allocation in primary
distribution network. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2006. 28(10): p.
669-678.
197. Hedayati, H., et al., A method for placement of DG units in distribution networks. Power Delivery,
IEEE Transactions on, 2008. 23(3): p. 1620-1628.
198. Hemdan, N.G. and M. Kurrat, Efficient integration of distributed generation for meeting the increased
load demand. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2011. 33(9): p. 1572-1583.
199. Kirkpatrick, S. and M.P. Vecchi, Optimization by simmulated annealing. science, 1983. 220(4598): p.
671-680.
200. Sutthibun, T. and P. Bhasaputra. Multi-objective optimal distributed generation placement using
simulated annealing. in Electrical Engineering/Electronics Computer Telecommunications and
Information Technology (ECTI-CON), 2010 International Conference on. 2010. IEEE.
201. Injeti, S.K. and N.P. Kumar, A novel approach to identify optimal access point and capacity of multiple
DGs in a small, medium and large scale radial distribution systems. International Journal of Electrical
Power & Energy Systems, 2013. 45(1): p. 142-151.
202. Nahman, J.M. and D.M. Peric, Optimal planning of radial distribution networks by simulated
annealing technique. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2008. 23(2): p. 790-795.
203. Goldberg, D.E., Genetic algorithms in search optimization and machine learning. Vol. 412. 1989:
Addison-wesley Reading Menlo Park.
204. Pham, D. and D. Karaboga, Intelligent optimisation techniques: genetic algorithms, tabu search,
simulated annealing and neural networks. 2012: Springer Science & Business Media.
205. Lai, L.L. and J. Ma, Application of evolutionary programming to reactive power planning-comparison
with nonlinear programming approach. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 1997. 12(1): p. 198-
206.
206. Silvestri, A., A. Berizzi, and S. Buonanno. Distributed generation planning using genetic algorithms.
in Electric Power Engineering, 1999. PowerTech Budapest 99. International Conference on. 1999.
IEEE.
207. Kim, J., et al., Dispersed generation planning using improved Hereford ranch algorithm. Electric
Power Systems Research, 1998. 47(1): p. 47-55.
208. Gandomkar, M., M. Vakilian, and M. Ehsan. Optimal distributed generation allocation in distribution
network using Hereford Ranch algorithm. in Electrical Machines and Systems, 2005. ICEMS 2005.
Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on. 2005. IEEE.
209. Placement of distributed generators and reclosers for distribution network security
and reliability. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2005. 27(5): p. 398-408.
210. Singh, D. and K. Verma, Multiobjective optimization for DG planning with load models. Power
Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2009. 24(1): p. 427-436.
211. Teng, J.-H., T.-S. Luor, and Y.-H. Liu. Strategic distributed generator placements for service
reliability improvements. in Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, 2002 IEEE. 2002. IEEE.
212. Harrison, G.P., et al., Hybrid GA and OPF evaluation of network capacity for distributed generation
connections. Electric Power Systems Research, 2008. 78(3): p. 392-398.
213. Harrison, G.P., et al., Distributed generation capacity evaluation using combined genetic algorithm
and OPF. International Journal of Emerging Electric Power Systems, 2007. 8(2).
214. Falaghi, H., et al., DG integrated multistage distribution system expansion planning. International
Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2011. 33(8): p. 1489-1497.
215. Mirhoseini, S.H., et al., A new improved adaptive imperialist competitive algorithm to solve the
reconfiguration problem of distribution systems for loss reduction and voltage profile improvement.
International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2014. 55: p. 128-143.
216. Ochoa, L.F., A. Padilha-Feltrin, and G.P. Harrison, Time-series-based maximization of distributed wind
power generation integration. Energy Conversion, IEEE Transactions on, 2008. 23(3): p. 968-974.
217. Siano, P. and G. Mokryani, Evaluating the benefits of optimal allocation of wind turbines for
distribution network operators. IEEE Systems Journal, 2015. 9(2): p. 629-638.
218. Ahmadi, M., et al. Multi objective distributed generation planning using NSGA-II. in Power
Electronics and Motion Control Conference, 2008. EPE-PEMC 2008. 13th. 2008. IEEE.
219. Wang, C. and Y. Gao, Determination of power distribution network configuration using non-revisiting
genetic algorithm. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2013. 28(4): p. 3638-3648.
220. Golshan, M.H. and S. Arefifar, Distributed generation, reactive sources and network-configuration
planning for power and energy-loss reduction. IEE PROCEEDINGS GENERATION
TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION, 2006. 153(2): p. 127.
221. Nara, K., et al. Application of tabu search to optimal placement of distributed generators. in Power
Engineering Society Winter Meeting, 2001. IEEE. 2001. IEEE.
222. Maciel, R. and A. Padilha-Feltrin. Distributed generation impact evaluation using a multi-objective
Tabu Search. in Intelligent System Applications to Power Systems, 2009. ISAP'09. 15th International
Conference on. 2009. IEEE.
223. Eberhart, R.C. and J. Kennedy. A new optimizer using particle swarm theory. in Proceedings of the
sixth international symposium on micro machine and human science. 1995. New York, NY.
224. AlRashidi, M.R. and M.E. El-Hawary, A survey of particle swarm optimization applications in electric
power systems. Evolutionary Computation, IEEE Transactions on, 2009. 13(4): p. 913-918.
225. Del Valle, Y., et al., Particle swarm optimization: basic concepts, variants and applications in power
systems. Evolutionary Computation, IEEE Transactions on, 2008. 12(2): p. 171-195.
226. Krueasuk, W. and W. Ongsakul. Optimal placement of distributed generation using particle swarm
optimization. in Proceedings of Power Engineering Conference in Australasian Universities, Australia.
2006. Citeseer.
227. Beromi, Y.A., M. Sedighizadeh, and M. Sadighi. A particle swarm optimization for sitting and sizing of
distributed generation in distribution network to improve voltage profile and reduce THD and losses.
in Universities Power Engineering Conference, 2008. UPEC 2008. 43rd International. 2008. IEEE.
228. Niknam, T. An approach based on particle swarm optimization for optimal operation of distribution
network considering distributed generators. in IEEE Industrial Electronics, IECON 2006-32nd Annual
Conference on. 2006. IEEE.
229. Siano, P. and G. Mokryani, Assessing wind turbines placement in a distribution market environment by
using particle swarm optimization. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2013. 28(4): p. 3852-3864.
230. Raj, P.A.-D.-V., et al., Optimization of distributed generation capacity for line loss reduction and
voltage profile improvement using PSO. Elektrika Journal of Electrical Engineering, 2008. 10(2): p. 41-
48.
231. Jain, N., S. Singh, and S. Srivastava. Planning and impact evaluation of distributed generators in
Indian context using multi-objective particle swarm optimization. in Power and Energy Society
General Meeting, 2011 IEEE. 2011. IEEE.
232. Aghaei, J., et al., Distribution expansion planning considering reliability and security of energy using
modified PSO (Particle Swarm Optimization) algorithm. Energy, 2014. 65: p. 398-411.
233. Jamian, J.J., M.W. Mustafa, and H. Mokhlis, Optimal multiple distributed generation output through
rank evolutionary particle swarm optimization. Neurocomputing, 2015. 152: p. 190-198.
234. Zeinalzadeh, A., Y. Mohammadi, and M.H. Moradi, Optimal multi objective placement and sizing of
multiple DGs and shunt capacitor banks simultaneously considering load uncertainty via MOPSO
approach. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2015. 67: p. 336-349.
235. Guan, W., et al., Distribution system feeder reconfiguration considering different model of DG sources.
International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2015. 68: p. 210-221.
236. Dorigo, M. and C. Blum, Ant colony optimization theory: A survey. Theoretical computer science,
2005. 344(2): p. 243-278.
237. Chu, S.-C., J.F. Roddick, and J.-S. Pan, Ant colony system with communication strategies. Information
Sciences, 2004. 167(1): p. 63-76.
238. Gómez, F., et al., Ant colony system algorithm for the planning of primary distribution circuits. Power
Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2004. 19(2): p. 996-1004.
239. Teng, J.-H. and Y.-H. Liu, A novel ACS-based optimum switch relocation method. Power Systems,
IEEE Transactions on, 2003. 18(1): p. 113-120.
240. Vlachogiannis, J.G., N.D. Hatziargyriou, and K.Y. Lee, Ant colony system-based algorithm for
constrained load flow problem. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2005. 20(3): p. 1241-1249.
241. Falaghi, H. and M.-R. Haghifam. ACO based algorithm for distributed generation sources allocation
and sizing in distribution systems. in Power Tech, 2007 IEEE Lausanne. 2007. IEEE.
242. Wang, L. and C. Singh, Reliability-constrained optimum placement of reclosers and distributed
generators in distribution networks using an ant colony system algorithm. Systems, Man, and
Cybernetics, Part C: Applications and Reviews, IEEE Transactions on, 2008. 38(6): p. 757-764.
243. Kaur, D. and J. Sharma, Multiperiod shunt capacitor allocation in radial distribution systems.
International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2013. 52: p. 247-253.
244. Mirhoseini, S.H., et al., Multi-objective Reconfiguration of Distribution Network Using a Heuristic
Modified Ant Colony Optimization Algorithm. Modeling and Simulation in Electrical and Electronics
Engineering, 2015. 1(1): p. 23-33.
245. Karaboga, D., An idea based on honey bee swarm for numerical optimization. 2005, Technical report-
tr06, Erciyes university, engineering faculty, computer engineering department.
246. El-Zonkoly, A.M., Multistage expansion planning for distribution networks including unit commitment.
Generation, Transmission & Distribution, IET, 2013. 7(7): p. 766-778.
247. Padma Lalitha, M., V. Veera Reddy, and N. Sivarami Reddy, Application of fuzzy and ABC algorithm
for DG placement for minimum loss in radial distribution system. Iranian Journal of Electrical and
Electronic Engineering, 2010. 6(4): p. 248-257.
248. Mohandas, N., R. Balamurugan, and L. Lakshminarasimman, Optimal location and sizing of real
power DG units to improve the voltage stability in the distribution system using ABC algorithm united
with chaos. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2015. 66: p. 41-52.
249. Abu-Mouti, F.S. and M. El-Hawary, Optimal distributed generation allocation and sizing in
distribution systems via artificial bee colony algorithm. Power Delivery, IEEE Transactions on, 2011.
26(4): p. 2090-2101.
250. Carrano, E.G., et al., Electric distribution network expansion under load-evolution uncertainty using an
immune system inspired algorithm. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 2007. 22(2): p. 851-861.
251. Aghaebrahimi, M., M. Amiri, and S. Zahiri. An immune-based optimization method for distributed
generation placement in order to minimize power losses. in Sustainable Power Generation and Supply,
2009. SUPERGEN'09. International Conference on. 2009. IEEE.
252. Souza, B.B., et al., Immune system memetic algorithm for power distribution network design with load
evolution uncertainty. Electric Power Systems Research, 2011. 81(2): p. 527-537.
253. Passino, K.M., Biomimicry of bacterial foraging for distributed optimization and control. Control
Systems, IEEE, 2002. 22(3): p. 52-67.
254. Singh, S., T. Ghose, and S. Goswami, Optimal feeder routing based on the bacterial foraging
technique. Power Delivery, IEEE Transactions on, 2012. 27(1): p. 70-78.
255. Devi, S. and M. Geethanjali, Application of modified bacterial foraging optimization algorithm for
optimal placement and sizing of distributed generation. Expert Systems with Applications, 2014. 41(6):
p. 2772-2781.
256. Devabalaji, K., K. Ravi, and D. Kothari, Optimal location and sizing of capacitor placement in radial
distribution system using bacterial foraging optimization algorithm. International Journal of Electrical
Power & Energy Systems, 2015. 71: p. 383-390.
257. Kowsalya, M., Optimal size and siting of multiple distributed generators in distribution system using
bacterial foraging optimization. Swarm and Evolutionary Computation, 2014. 15: p. 58-65.
258. Yang, X.-S., A new metaheuristic bat-inspired algorithm, in Nature inspired cooperative strategies for
optimization (NICSO 2010). 2010, Springer. p. 65-74.
259. Yammani, C., S. Maheswarapu, and S.K. Matam. Optimal placement and sizing of DER's with load
models using BAT algorithm. in Circuits, Power and Computing Technologies (ICCPCT), 2013
International Conference on. 2013. IEEE.
260. Candelo-Becerra, J.E. and H.E. Hernández-Riaño, Distributed generation placement in radial
distribution networks using a bat-inspired algorithm. Dyna, 2015. 82(192): p. 60-67.
261. Devabalaji, K., et al., Power Loss Minimization in Radial Distribution System. Energy Procedia, 2015.
79: p. 917-923.
262. Atashpaz-Gargari, E. and C. Lucas. Imperialist competitive algorithm: an algorithm for optimization
inspired by imperialistic competition. in Evolutionary Computation, 2007. CEC 2007. IEEE Congress
on. 2007. IEEE.
263. Mahari, A. and E. Babaei. Optimal DG placement and sizing in distribution systems using imperialistic
competition algorithm. in Power Electronics (IICPE), 2012 IEEE 5th India International Conference
on. 2012. IEEE.
264. Moradi, M.H., et al., An efficient hybrid method for solving the optimal sitting and sizing problem of
DG and shunt capacitor banks simultaneously based on imperialist competitive algorithm and genetic
algorithm. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2014. 54: p. 101-111.
265. Poornazaryan, B., et al., Optimal allocation and sizing of DG units considering voltage stability, losses
and load variations. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2016. 79: p. 42-52.
266. Yang, X.-S. and S. Deb. Cuckoo search via Lévy flights. in Nature & Biologically Inspired Computing,
2009. NaBIC 2009. World Congress on. 2009. IEEE.
267. Nguyen, T.T., A.V. Truong, and T.A. Phung, A novel method based on adaptive cuckoo search for
optimal network reconfiguration and distributed generation allocation in distribution network.
International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2016. 78: p. 801-815.
268. Moravej, Z. and A. Akhlaghi, A novel approach based on cuckoo search for DG allocation in
distribution network. International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2013. 44(1): p. 672-
679.
269. Fard, M.M., R.N. Oroozian, and S. Molaei. Determining the optimal placement and capacity of DG in
intelligent distribution networks under uncertainty demands by COA. in Smart Grids (ICSG), 2012 2nd
Iranian Conference on. 2012. IEEE.
270. Buaklee, W. and K. Hongesombut. Optimal DG allocation in a smart distribution grid using Cuckoo
Search algorithm. in Electrical Engineering/Electronics, Computer, Telecommunications and
Information Technology (ECTI-CON), 2013 10th International Conference on. 2013. IEEE.
271. Shah-Hosseini, H. Problem solving by intelligent water drops. in IEEE congress on evolutionary
computation. 2007.
272. Prabha, D.R., et al., Optimal location and sizing of distributed generation unit using intelligent water
drop algorithm. Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments, 2015. 11: p. 106-113.
273. Moradi, M. and M. Abedini, A novel method for optimal DG units capacity and location in Microgrids.
International Journal of Electrical Power & Energy Systems, 2016. 75: p. 236-244.
274. Momoh, J., X. Ma, and T. Tomsovic, Overview and literature survey of fuzzy set theory in power
systems. Power Systems, IEEE Transactions on, 1995. 10(3): p. 1676-1690.
275. Kim, K.-H., et al. Dispersed generator placement using fuzzy-GA in distribution systems. in Power
Engineering Society Summer Meeting, 2002 IEEE. 2002. IEEE.
276. Haghifam, M., H. Falaghi, and O. Malik, Risk-based distributed generation placement. IET Generation
Transmission and Distribution, 2008. 2(2): p. 252-260.
277. Lalitha, M.P., et al., Application of fuzzy and PSO for DG placement for minimum loss in radial
distribution system. ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 2010. 5(4): p. 32-37.
278. Reddy, V.U. and A. Manoj, Optimal capacitor placement for loss reduction in distribution systems
using bat algorithm. IOSR journal of Engineering, 2012. 2(10): p. 23-27.
279. Yang, X.-S., Firefly algorithms for multimodal optimization, in Stochastic algorithms: foundations and
applications. 2009, Springer. p. 169-178.
280. Nadhir, K., D. Chabane, and B. Tarek, Distributed generation location and size determination to
reduce power losses of a distribution feeder by Firefly Algorithm. International Journal of Advanced
Science and Technology, 2013. 56: p. 61-72.
281. Nadhir, K., D. Chabane, and B. Tarek. Firefly algorithm based energy loss minimization approach for
optimal sizing & placement of distributed generation. in Modeling, Simulation and Applied
Optimization (ICMSAO), 2013 5th International Conference on. 2013. IEEE.
282. Othman, M., et al., Optimal placement and sizing of voltage controlled distributed generators in
unbalanced distribution networks using supervised firefly algorithm. International Journal of Electrical
Power & Energy Systems, 2016. 82: p. 105-113.
283. Yammani, C., et al. Optimal placement and sizing of the DER in distribution systems using shuffled
frog leap algorithm. in Recent Advances in Intelligent Computational Systems (RAICS), 2011 IEEE.
2011. IEEE.
284. Erol, O.K. and I. Eksin, A new optimization method: big bang big crunch. Advances in Engineering
Software, 2006. 37(2): p. 106-111.
285. Esmaeili, M., M. Sedighizadeh, and M. Esmaili, Multi-objective optimal reconfiguration and DG
(Distributed Generation) power allocation in distribution networks using Big Bang-Big Crunch
algorithm considering load uncertainty. Energy, 2016. 103: p. 86-99.
286. Georgilakis, P.S. and N.D. Hatziargyriou, A review of power distribution planning in the modern
power systems era: Models, methods and future research. Electric Power Systems Research, 2015.
121: p. 89-100.
287. Das, S., et al., On stability of the chemotactic dynamics in bacterial-foraging optimization algorithm.
Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans, IEEE Transactions on, 2009. 39(3): p.
670-679.
288. Golestani, S. and M. Tadayon. Distributed generation dispatch optimization by artificial neural
network trained by particle swarm optimization algorithm. in Energy Market (EEM), 2011 8th
International Conference on the European. 2011. IEEE.
289. Karaboga, D. and B. Basturk, On the performance of artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm. Applied
soft computing, 2008. 8(1): p. 687-697.
290. Artificial bee colony data miner (abc-miner). in Innovations in
Intelligent Systems and Applications (INISTA), 2011 International Symposium on. 2011. IEEE.