PUBLISHED BY

World's largest Science,

Technology & Medicine
Open Access book publisher

98,000+
2,850+ INTERNATIONAL 91+ MILLION
OPEN ACCESS BOOKS AUTHORS AND EDITORS DOWNLOADS

AUTHORS AMONG
BOOKS TOP 1% 12.2%
DELIVERED TO AUTHORS AND EDITORS
MOST CITED SCIENTIST FROM TOP 500 UNIVERSITIES
151 COUNTRIES

Selection of our books indexed in the

Book Citation Index in Web of Science
Core Collection (BKCI)

Chapter from the book Genetic Algorithms in Applications

Downloaded from: http://www.intechopen.com/books/genetic-algorithms-in-
applications

Interested in publishing with InTechOpen?

Contact us at [email protected]
 6

Genetic Algorithms Application

to Electric Power Systems
Abdel-aal H. Mantawy
Ain Shams University, Faculty of Engineering,
Electrical Power and Machines Department,
Egypt

1. Introduction
The economic operation problem in electric power systems involves the scheduling of both
thermal and hydro generating units to minimize the cost of supplying the power
requirements of the system over a certain period under specified system constraints.
With the opening of the power industry to competition, the power system structure is
changing. According to these changes, power system operation, planning, and control need
modifications. In the past, utilities had to produce power to satisfy their customers with
objective to minimize costs and all demand/reserve were met. However, it is not necessary
in a restructured system. Under new structure, generation companies schedule their
generators with objective to maximize their own profit without regard for system social
benefit. Power and reserve prices become important factors in decision process.
The optimal scheduling of thermal generating units in the electrical power system is called
thermal UC. The Unit Commitment Problem (UCP) is the problem of selecting the
generating units to be in service during a scheduling period and for how long. The
committed units must meet the system load and reserve requirements at minimum
operating cost, subject to a variety of constraints. To solve the UCP, another crucial problem
must simultaneously be solved; the economic dispatch problem.
The Economic Dispatch Problem (EDP) is the optimal allocation of the load demand among
the running units while satisfying the power balance equations and the units operating
limits [1-3].
The UCP is obtained by considering many factors, including:

Unit operating costs/constraints

Generation and reserve constraints; and

Plant start-up and shut down constraints.
The objective of this report is to introduce the general UCP and discuss various
considerations involving the chapter solution of this problem. It also aims to summarize the
methods that have been used to solve this problem. Moreover an interest will be given to the
Genetic Algorithms [4, 5] technique as a powerful tool to solve the UCP as one of the
complex optimization problems.

www.intechopen.com
92 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

This chapter includes seven sections organized as follows: In section 2, a literature survey
for the UCP solution methods is presented. Section 3 introduces the problem formulation. In
section 4, genetic algorithm background is presented. Section 5, outlines the genetic
algorithm solution to the UCP. In section 6, general conclusions of the chapter report are
presented. Section 7 includes the chapter report references.

2. Literature survey
The solution of the UCP is really a complex optimization problem. It comprises the solution
of the EDP as well. The UCP can be considered as two linked optimization problems. The
first is the UCP, which is considered as a combinatorial problem, and the second is the EDP,
which is a nonlinear programming problem. The exact solution of the UCP can be obtained
by a complete enumeration of all feasible combinations of generating units, which could be
a massive number. Then, the EDP is solved for each feasible combination. Basically, the high
dimension of the possible solution space is the real difficulty in solving the problem.
The solution methods being used to solve the UCP can be divided into four categories [1-74]:
Classical optimization methods such as: Dynamic Programming, Integer and Mixed
Integer Programming, Lagrangian Relaxation, Linear Programming, Network Flow

Programming, Probabilistic Methods and other methods [6-18].

Heuristic methods such as Priority List and Expert Systems [19-21].

Artificial Intelligence methods such as: Neural Networks, Simulated Annealing, Tabu

Search and Genetic Algorithms [22-57].

Hybrid Algorithms: hybridization of two or more of the previously mentioned methods
[58-74].
In the following, a survey of the classical optimization methods that have been reported in
the literature is presented.

2.1 Artificial intelligence methods

The growing interest for the application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques to power
engineering has introduced the potentials of using the state-of-the art in many problems in
power systems.
AI methods seem to be promising and are still evolving. Currently, four methods that are
perceived as affiliated in some measure with the AI field have gained prominence as
frameworks for solving different problems. AI techniques have been applied successfully to
solve the UCP [99-163].

Neural Networks (NN), [22-26],

Simulated Annealing (SA), [27-28],

Tabu Search (TS), [29-30], and

Genetic Algorithm (GA), [31-57].
GA, NN and TS are inspired by principles derived from biological processes, and SA is
derived from material sciences. These methods need not be viewed competitively, and they
comprise the emergence of promise for conquering the combinatorial explosion in a variety of

www.intechopen.com
Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems 93

decision-making arenas. NN have claimed intriguing successes in pattern-recognition

applications, but have generally performed less than impressively in optimization settings. SA,
TS and GA have the attractive feature of assured convergence under appropriate assumptions.
In the following section a brief description of the applicability of the GA for the UCP is
presented:

2.2 Genetic algorithms application to the UCP

Genetic Algorithms (GAs) have become increasingly popular in recent years in science and
engineering disciplines [31-34]. The GA, as a powerful tool to achieve global optima, has
been successfully used for the solution of this complex optimization problem. Several
papers have been published in solving the UCP using the GA [35-57].
The solution coding is the most important point in applying the GA to solve any
optimization problem. Coding could be in a real or a binary form. Coded strings of solutions
are called chromosomes." A group of these solutions (chromosomes) are called population.
Moving from one population of chromosomes to a new population is set by selection,
together with a set of genetic operators of crossover, mutation and inversion. Since the UCP
lends itself to the binary coding in which zero denotes the OFF state and a one represents
the ON state, all published works used the binary coding. A candidate solution is a string
whose length is the product of the number of generating units and the scheduling periods.
Fitness function is the second issue in solving the UCP using GA. In the literature the fitness
function is constructed as the summation of the operating costs and penalty terms for
constraints violations.
A basic advantage of the GA solution is that it can be easily converted to work on parallel
computers. A disadvantage of the GA is that, since they are stochastic optimization
algorithms, the optimality of the solution they provide cannot be guaranteed. However, the
results reported indicate good performance of the method.
The following is a summary of a literature survey on solving the UCP using the GA [35-57]:
In 1994, D. Dasgupta et al. [35] presented a paper, which discusses the application of GA to
solve the short term UCP. In this work, the problem is considered as a multi-period process
and a simple GA is used for commitment scheduling. Each chromosome is encoded in the
form of a position-dependent gene (bit string) representing the status of units available in
the system, (on/off), at a specific time period. The fitness function is formulated by using a
weighted sum of the objective function, and values of the penalty function based on the
number of constraints violated and the extent of these violations.
Hong-Tzer Yang, Pai-Chuan Yang and Ching-Lien Huang, 1995, [36], proposed an
innovative GA (GA) approach to solve the thermal UCP in power generation industry
through a constraint satisfaction technique. Due to a large variety of constraints to be
satisfied, the solution space of the UCP is highly nonconvex, and therefore the UCP cannot
be solved efficiently by the standard GA.
Hong-Tzer Yang, Pai-Chuan Yang and Ching-Lien Huang [37] modified their previous
algorithm [36]. Ramp rate constraints on the units being started up or shut down are tackled
in the economic dispatch subprogram by limiting the associated maximum available

www.intechopen.com
94 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

capacities for generating. The proposed approach is shown to be well amenable to parallel
implementation.
In 1995, X. Ma et al. [38] presented a new approach based on the GA to solve the UCP. The
coding scheme used was the binary coding. A forced mutation operator was adopted to
correct the solutions (or chromosomes) that do not satisfy the load demand and reserve
constraints. The fitness function was constructed from the objective function and penalty
terms for constraints violation.
S. A. Kazarlis et al. [39], 1996, presented a GA solution to the UCP. The coding was
implemented in a binary form. Fitness function was constructed from the objective function
and penalty terms of constraints violation. A nonlinear transformation was used for fitness
function scaling. With the technique of the varying quality function, the GA finally manages
to locate the exact global optimum.
In 1996, P. C. Yang et al. [40] presented a practical approach for using the GA to solve the
UCP. The implemented algorithm deals with the constraints in a different manner. The
proposed algorithm, along with SA and LR is applied to solve a Taiwan power system
consisting of 38-unit over a 24-hour period. With a reasonable computation time, the cost of
the solution obtained by the GA approach was found to be the lowest among the three
methods (GA, SA and LR).
S. O. Orero [41], 1996, proposed an enhanced GA approach for the UCP. The major
difference between this approach and the previous ones is that it incorporates what was
called a sequential decomposition logic, to provide a faster search mechanism. In this
approach, the selection, mutation, and crossover operators are restricted to a single time
interval. An advantage of this approach is that any constraints, which are already satisfied,
cannot be violated later in the sequence.
G. B. Sheble et al. [42], 1996, presented a paper to discuss the applicability of the GA
approach to the UCP and the EDP. The first half of the paper presented the problems that
the author has faced, when applying the GA to the UCP. The two main problems
encountered when using a GA with penalty methods are the crossover operator can
introduce new constraints violations that were not in either parent, and the problem of
selecting penalty values for satisfying the five considered constraints is hopeless. These two
problems resulted in each generation of population members having a similar fitness or
similar UC schedule cost as the preceding generation. In the second half of the paper an
algorithm of solving the EDP using GA is implemented and successfully tested and
compared with the lambda iteration method.
Maifeld, T.T. and Sheble, G.B. [43], presented a new UC scheduling algorithm. The proposed
algorithm consists of using a GA with domain specific mutation operators. The proposed
algorithm can easily accommodate any constraint that can be true hosted. Robustness of the
proposed algorithm is demonstrated by comparison to a Lagrangian relaxation UC
algorithm on three different electric utilities.
Arroyo, J.M, Conejo, A. and Jimenez, N. [44], addressed the UCP with a new idea of
implementing an interior point GA conducted through heuristics to get a near optimal
solution to the problem. The modeling framework provided was less restrictive than the
frameworks provided by other approaches such as dynamic programming or Lagrangian
relaxation. The CPU time requirement to solve problems of realistic size was moderate.

www.intechopen.com
Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems 95

In 1997, Mantawy, A.H., Abdel-Magid, Y.L. and Selim, S.Z. [45], presented a new GA
approach to solve the UCP in electric power systems. In the proposed algorithm, coding the
UCP solution is based on mixing binary and decimal representations. A fitness function is
constructed from the total operating cost of the generating units without penalty terms.
Genetic operators are implemented to enhance the search speed and to save memory space.
The UCP is divided into two subproblems a combinatorial optimization problem and a
nonlinear programming problem. The former is solved using the proposed GA while the
latter problem is solved via a quadratic programming routine.
Mantawy, A.H., Abdel-Magid, Y.L. and Selim, S.Z. [46], presents an improved algorithm to the
one in [143]. To improve the fine-tuning capabilities of the GA and escape from entrapment in
local minimum, a special mutation operator based on a local search algorithm is designed. The
new operator enhanced the speed of convergence and improved the quality of solution.
Zhao Hongwei, Yi Liangting, Wang Buyun, Cheng Gang and Yang Haiping [47], presented
a revised GA for UCP. The model adjusts the parameters of GA automatically with the
population evolution and different chromosomes. A new convergence rule is also given to
enhance the convergence speed with global optimum reserved.
Hong-Tzer Yang, Pai-Chuan Yang and Ching-Lien Huang [48], proposed a parallel GA
approach to solving the thermal UCP by using a constraint handling technique. The
proposed topology of dual-direction ring is shown to be well amenable to parallel
implementation of the GA for the UCP.
Zhu Mingyu, Cen Wenhui, Wang Mingyou and Zhang Peichao [49], proposed an enhanced
GA to solve the UCP. The new features of the proposed algorithm include chromosome
mapping, problem specific operators and local search technique. Significant improvements
have been achieved with this implantation.
In 1999, Juste, K.A., Kita, H., Tanaka, E. and Hasegawa, J.[50] proposed algorithm to employ
the evolutionary programming (EP) technique, in which populations of contending
solutions are evolved through random changes, competition, and selection. The practical
implementation of this procedure yielded satisfactory results.
F [50] proposed modification to counter the drawbacks of the GA which are their slow
processing speed and their solution inconsistency. The method proposes a sequential UC
implementation. It decouples a 24-hour UCP into 24 individual scheduling problems. The
proposed modified GA algorithm was successfully tested with 6 generators system.
Christiansen, J.C., Dortolina, C.A. and Bermudez, J.P. [52] presented a new implementation
of GA to solve the UCP. The proposed algorithm includes the basic GA operators (cross over
and mutation) besides five particular operators that proved to be very useful in order to
obtain faster and more accurate solutions lowering the possibility of reaching local
optimums.
In January 2002, Senjyu, T., Yamashiro, H., Uezato, K. and Funabashi, T. [53] present a new
approach for thermal UCP. To handle the UCP constraints, some cording methods have
been proposed. However, these methods require computation time. To overcome these
problems, a new genetic operator based on unit characteristic classification and intelligent
techniques generating initial populations are introduced.

www.intechopen.com
96 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

In February 2002, Swarup, K.S. and Yamashiro, S. [54] presented a solution methodology of
UCP using GA. Problem specific operators are proposed for the satisfaction of time
dependent constraints. Problem formulation, representation and the simulation results for a
10 generator-scheduling problem are presented
Haoyong Chen Xifan Wang [55] presented a new cooperative co-evolutionary algorithm
(CCA) for UCP. CCA is an extension of the traditional GA (GA), which appears to have
considerable potential for formulating and solving more complex problems by explicitly
modeling the coevolution of cooperating species. This method combines the basic ideas of
Lagrangian relaxation technique (LR) and GA to form a two-level approach.
In November 2002, Arroyo, J.M. and Conejo, A.J. [56] addressed the UCP of thermal units.
This paper proposed a novel repair GA conducted through heuristics to achieve a near
optimal solution to this problem. This optimization technique is directly parallelizable.
In August 2003, Mashhadi, H.R. and Shanechi, H.M. Lucas, C. [57] proposed an improved
GA to solve the UCP. In order to improve the convergence of the GA, a new local optimizer
for the UCP based on Lamarck theory in the evolution, has been proposed. This local
optimizer, which tries to improve the fitness of one chromosome in the population,
effectively uses the information generated in calculating the fitness.

2.3 Hybrid algorithms

Hybrid algorithms are also well known techniques for solving engineering problems.
Hybrid algorithms try to make use of the merits of different methods. Hence, the aim is to
improve the performance of algorithms that are based on a single method. The main
objective of proposing an algorithm as a hybrid of two or more methods is to speed up the
convergence and/or to get better quality of solutions than that obtained when applying the
individual methods.
Different hybrid algorithms, used to solve the UCP, are available in the literature [58-74].
These algorithms consist of two or more of the following methods: Classical Optimization
(e.g. DP, LP, and LR), Heuristics, and Artificial Intelligence, (e.g. NN, and GA).
The following survey is divided into two parts: hybrid algorithms without the GA and
hybrid algorithms with the GA

2.3.1 Hybrid algorithms with the GA

Many AI and classical optimization techniques have been hybridized with the GA to solve
the UCP. The following is a summary of these algorithms:
In 1994, Gerald B. Sheble et al. [62] presented a genetic-based UCP algorithm. The
algorithm uses the ES to satisfy some of the UCP constraints. The advantage of the
algorithm is that the EDP routine is only used with the initialization and mutation
subroutines. Since the mutation is a technique that changes a small percentage of the on/off
status of the generating unit schedule, the only times ED is needed is for the hours where a
mutation has occurred. An adaptive mutation operator is used.
In 1995, S. O. Orero et al. [65] proposed an algorithm to incorporate a PL scheme in a hybrid
GA to solve the UCP. In the GA coding process, the solution string length is the product of

www.intechopen.com
Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems 97

the scheduling period T, and the number of generating units N. Accordingly; the search
space of the GA is then equal to 2 TxN which is a very large number. Due to this problem, a
premature convergence of the GA search has occurred. To counteract this problem, a
method of decomposition was proposed to limit the GA search space to 2 N .
Mantawy, A.H., Abdel-Magid, Y.L. and Selim, S.Z. [68] presented a new algorithm based on
integrating GA, TS and SA methods to solve the UCP. The core of the proposed algorithm is
based on GAs. TS is used to generate new population members in the reproduction phase of
the GA. A SA method is used to accelerate the convergence of the GA by applying the SA
for all the population members. A new implementation of the GA is introduced. In the TS
part of the proposed algorithm, a simple short-term memory procedure is used to counter
the danger of entrapment at a local optimum, and the premature convergence of the GA. A
simple cooling schedule has been implemented to apply the SA test in the algorithm.
Chuan-Ping Cheng, Chih-Wen Liu and Chun-Chang Liu [70-72] presented an application of
a combined GA and LR methods for the UCP (LRGA). The proposed LRGA incorporates
GA into LR method to update the Lagrangian multipliers and improve the performance of
LR method in solving combinatorial optimization problems such as the UCP.
Mantawy, A.H., Abdel-Magid, Y.L. and Selim, S.Z. [67] presented a new algorithm based on
integrating GA and TS to solve a fuzzy UCP model. The core of the proposed algorithm is
based on the GA while TS is used to generate new population members in the reproduction
phase of the GA. The uncertainties in the load demand and the spinning reserve constraints
are formulated in a fuzzy logic (FL) frame. A fitness function is constructed from the total
operating cost of the generating units with penalty term related fuzzy spinning reserve and
load demand membership functions. In the TS part of the proposed algorithm, a simple
short-term memory procedure is used to counter the danger of entrapment at a local
optimum, and the premature convergence of the GA.
Mantawy, A.H [71] presented a fuzzy model for the UCP. The model takes the uncertainties
in the forecasted load demand and the spinning reserve constraints in a fuzzy frame. The
genetic algorithm (GA) approach is then used to solve the proposed fuzzy UCP model. In
the implementation for the GA, coding of the UCP solutions is based on mixing binary and
decimal representations. A fitness function is constructed from the total operating cost of the
generating units plus a penalty term determined due to the fuzzy load and spinning reserve
membership functions.
Gwo-Ching Liao and Ta-Peng Tsao. [73], introduced a hybrid GA/fuzzy system and tabu
search method (GAFS-TS) for solving short-term thermal generating UCP. This system
makes three important improvements to the GA. First, it generates a set of feasible UC
schedules and then put the solution to TS. The GAFS has good global optima search
capabilities, but poor local optima search capabilities. The TS method has good local optima
search capabilities.

3. Unit Commitment Problem formulation

The Unit Commitment Problem (UCP) is the problem of selecting the generating units to be
in service during a scheduling period and for how long. The committed units must meet the

www.intechopen.com
98 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

system load and reserve requirements at minimum operating cost, subject to a variety of
constraints. The Economic Dispatch Problem (EDP) deals with the optimal allocation of the
load demand among the running units while satisfying the power balance equations and
units operating limits [1].
The solution of the UCP using artificial intelligence techniques requires three major steps:

A problem statement or, system modeling,

Rules for generating trial solutions, and

An efficient algorithm for solving the EDP.
Problem Statement: Modeling of power system components affecting the economic
operation of the system is the most important step when solving the UCP. The degree of
details in components modeling varies with the desired accuracy and the nature of the
problem under study. The basic components of a power system include generating power
stations, transformer, transmission network, and system load.
This work is concerned with thermal generating units scheduling. Hence it is assumed that
the network is capable of transmitting the power generated to the load centers without
neither losses nor network failures. This means that the network is assumed to be perfectly
reliable. Consequently, the following basic engineering assumptions are made [1-3]:

The network interchange between the system under study and other systems is fixed.

Adding or removing generating units does not affect the load demand.
The operating cost of a generating unit is assumed to be composed of three
components; start-up cost, spinning (no load) cost, and production (loading) cost.
In the UCP under consideration, one is interested in a solution, which minimizes the total
operating cost during the scheduling time horizon while several constraints are satisfied.
The objective function and the constraints of the UCP are described in Sections 3.1 and 3.2.

3.1 The objective function

The objective function of the UCP is represented by the total operating cost of thermal
generating units, which contains two major parts; the production costs and the start-up costs.

3.1.1 The production cost

The major component of the operating cost, for thermal and nuclear units, is the power
production cost of the committed units. The production cost is mainly the cost of fuel input per
hour, while maintenance and labor contribute only to a small extent. Conventionally the unit
production cost is expressed as a quadratic function of the unit output power as follows:

Fit (Pit ) A i P 2 it Bi Pit Ci $/HR (3.1)

3.1.2 The start-up cost

The second component of the operating cost is the start-up cost. The start-up cost is
attributed to the amount of energy consumed to bring the unit ON line. The start-up cost

www.intechopen.com
Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems 99

depends upon the down time of the unit. This can vary from maximum value, when the unit
is started from cold state, to a much smaller value, where the unit was recently turned off.
Calculation of the start-up cost depends also on the treatment method for the thermal unit
during down time periods. There are two methods for unit treatment during the OFF hours;
the cooling method and the banking method.
The former method allows the boiler of the unit to cool down and then reheat back up to the
operating temperature when recommitted on line.
In the latter method, the boiler operating temperature is maintained during the OFF time
using an additional amount of energy.
The cooling method is used in the present work, due to its practicability when applied to
real power systems. In this work, the start-up cost, for a unit i at time t, based on the cooling
method, is taken in a more general form as follows:

STit Soi [1 Di exp( Toffi / Tdown i )] Ei $ (3.2)

Accordingly, the overall operating cost of the generating units in the scheduling time
horizon (i.e. objective function of the UCP) is

FT (Uit Fit (Pit ) Vit STit WitSHit ) $

T N
(3.3)
t 1i 1

3.2 The constraints

The UCP is subject to many constraints depending on the nature of the power system under
study. The constraints, which are taken into consideration in this work, may be classified
into two main groups: system constraints and unit constraints.

3.2.1 System constraints

The system constraints, sometimes called coupling constraints, include also two categories:
the load demand and the spinning reserve constraints.
1. Load demand constraints
The load demand constraint is the most important constraint in the UCP. It basically means
that the generated power from all committed units must meet the system load demand. This
is formulated in the so-called balance equation as follows:

Uit Pit PDt ; 1tT

N

i1
(3.4)

2. Spinning reserve constraint

The spinning (operating) reserve is the total amount of generation capacity available from
all units synchronized (spinning) on the system minus the present load demand. It is
important to determine the suitable allocation of spinning reserve from two points of view:
the reliability requirements and the economic aspects.

www.intechopen.com
100 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

There are various methods for determining the spinning reserve [1,20,34,52]:
The reserve is computed as a percentage of the forecasted load demand, or
It is determined such that the system can make up for a loss of the highest rating unit in a
given period of time, or
Determination of the reserve requirements as a function of the system reliability, which is
evaluated on a probabilistic basis.
The most commonly used approach is computing the reserve as a given prespecified
amount, which is a percentage of the forecasted load demand, i.e.

Uit Pmax i (PDt R t ) ; 1tT

N

i1
(3.5)

3.2.2 Unit constraints

The constraints on the generating units (sometimes called local constraints) are described as
follow:
1. Generation limits
The generation limits represent the minimum-loading limit below which it is not
economical to load the unit, and the maximum loading limit above which the unit should
not be loaded.

U it Pmin i Pit Pmax i Uit ; 1 t T , 1 i N (3.6)

2. Minimum up/down time

If the unit is running, it cannot be turned OFF before a certain minimum time elapses. If the
unit is also down, it cannot be recommitted before a certain time elapse.

Toff i Tdown i
; 1iN
Ton i Tupi
(3.7)

These constraints could be formulated in a mathematical form as follows:

Tup 1
Ui,t l Vit Tup ; 1tT, 1iN
i

l0
(3.8)
i

Tdowni 1
(1 Ui,t l ) Wit Tdown ; 1tT, 1iN
l0
(3.9)
i

Vit Uit U i,t 1 ; 2tT,1iN (3.10)

Wit Ui,t 1 U it ; 2tT, 1iN (3.11)

www.intechopen.com
Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems 101

Vi1 Ui1 ; 1iN (3.12)

Wi1 1 Ui1 ; 1iN (3.13)

3. Units initial status constraint

The status of unit (e.g. hours of being ON or OFF) before the first hour in the proposed
schedule is an important factor to determine whether its new status violates the minimum
up/down constraints. Also, the initial status of the unit affects the start-up cost calculations.
4. Crew constraints
If the plant consists of two or more units, they cannot be turned ON at the same time due to
some technical conditions or manpower availability.
5. Unit availability constraint
Due to some abnormal conditions, e.g. forced outage or maintenance of a unit, the unit may
become unavailable. The unit may also be forced in service to increase reliability or stability
of the system, hence the unit becomes must run or fixed at a certain output. Otherwise the unit
is available. The availability constraint specifies the unit to be in one of the following
different situations; unavailable, must run, available, or fixed output (MW).
6. Units derating constraint
During the lifetime of a unit its performance could be changed due to many conditions, e.g.
aging factor, the environment, etc. These conditions may cause derating of the generating
unit. Consequently, the unit maximum and minimum limits are changed.

3.3 The economic dispatch problem

The economic dispatch problem (EDP) is an essential problem when solving the UCP. Once
a trial solution is generated, the corresponding operating cost of this solution is calculated
by solving the EDP. Consequently, using an efficient and fast algorithm for modeling and
solving the EDP improves the quality of the UCP solution, and therefore, the performance of
the overall UCP algorithm.
In brief, the EDP for a one-hour in the scheduling time horizon could be formulated as the
minimization of the summation of production costs of the committed units in this hour
subjected to the load demand and unit limits constraints as follows:

Fit (Pit ) A iP 2 it BiPit Ci

N
Minimize $/HR (3.14)
i 1

Subject to:

Pit PDt ; 1tT

N

i1
(3.15)

and

Pmin i Pit Pmax i ; 1 t T , 1 i N (3.16)

www.intechopen.com
102 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

Since the EDP is formulated in a quadratic function, the EDP is solved using a quadratic
programming routine.

4. Genetic algorithms approach

4.1 Overview
Genetic algorithms (GAs) have been developed by John Holland, his colleagues, and his
students at the University of Michigan in the early 1970s [3,5, 122-128]. GAs have become
increasingly popular in recent years in science and engineering disciplines. GAs have been
quite successfully applied to optimization problems like wire routing, scheduling, adaptive
control, game playing, cognitive modeling, transportation problems, traveling salesman
problems, optimal control problems, etc.
GAs are general-purpose search techniques based on principles inspired from the genetic
and evolution mechanisms observed in natural systems and populations of living beings.
Their basic principle is the maintenance of a population of solutions to a problem
(genotypes) in the form of encoded information individuals that evolve in time.
GAs are search methods based on the mechanics of natural selection and natural genetics.
They combine survival of the strongest among string structures with a structured, yet
random, information exchange. In every generation, a new set of artificially developed
strings is produced using elements of the strongest of the old; an occasional new element is
experimented with for enhancement. Although random in nature, genetic algorithms are not
random search. They efficiently utilize historical information to predict new search points
with expected improved performance. Furthermore, they are not fundamentally restricted
by assumptions about the search space (assumptions concerning continuity, existence of
derivatives uni-modality, and other matters). The genetic algorithm is an example of an
optimization procedure that utilizes random choice as a mechanism to control the search
through a coding of a parameter space.
GAs require the parameters of the optimization problem to be coded as a finite length string
over some finite alphabet. In many optimization methods we migrate from a single point in
the search space to the next using a transition rule to determine the next point. This point-to-
point method is dangerous because it may lead to locating local minima (maxima) in
multimodal (many peaked) search spaces. On the other hand, GAs work from a population of
strings at the same time, climbing several peaks in parallel; hence, reducing the possibility of
locating a false peak over methods that go point to point. The mechanics of a genetic algorithm
are extremely simple, only involving copying strings and swapping partial strings.
A simple genetic algorithm that produces satisfactory results in many applications problems
must have five components:
A genetic representation for potential solution to the problem; solution coding
A way to create an initial population of potential solutions; Initialization
An evaluation function that plays the role of the environment, rating solutions in terms of
their fitness function,
Genetic operators that alter the composition of children Genetic operators,

www.intechopen.com
Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems 103

Values for various parameters that the GA uses (e.g. population size, probabilities of
applying genetic operators, etc.); parameters settings and selection

4.2 Solution coding

GAs require the natural parameters set of the optimization problem to be coded as a finite-
length string over some finite alphabet. Coding is the most important point in applying the
GA to solve any optimization problem. Coding could be in a real or a binary form. Coded
strings of solutions are called chromosomes. A group of these solutions (chromosomes)
are called population.
In this step, a coding scheme is selected to code the parameter subject to optimization. This
will allow access to parameter features that are not apparent using the parameter default
code. This access will allow more freedom and resolution for modifying the parameter
features to arrive at the optimal solution.

4.3 Fitness function

The fitness function is the second important issue in solving optimization problems using
GAs. It is often necessary to map the underlying natural objective function to a fitness
function through one or more mappings. The first mapping is done to transform the
objective function into a maximization problem rather than minimization to suit the GA
concepts of selecting the fittest chromosome, which has the highest objective function.
A second important mapping is the scaling of the fitness function values. Scaling is an
important step during the search procedures of the GA. This is done to keep appropriate
levels of competition throughout a simulation. Without scaling, early on there is a tendency
for a few superindividuals to dominate the selection process. Later on, when the population
has largely converged, competition among population members is less strong and
simulation tends to wander. Thus, Scaling is a useful process to prevent both the premature
convergence of the algorithm and the random improvement that may occur in the late
iterations of the algorithm. There are many methods for scaling such as linear, sigma
truncation, and power law scaling [4]. Linear scaling is the most commonly used and will be

information to preprocess raw fitness values prior to scaling is used. It is called sigma ( )
discussed in details in Section 5.3. In the sigma truncation method, population variance

truncation because of the use of population standard deviation information; a constant is

subtracted from raw fitness values as follows:

f ' f (f ' c. ) (5.1)

In equation (5.1) the constant c is chosen as a reasonable multiple of the population standard
deviation and negative results ( f ' <0) are arbitrarily set to 0. Following sigma truncation,
fitness scaling can proceed as described without the danger of negative results.

4.4 Genetic algorithms operators

There are usually three operators in a typical GA; reproduction, crossover and mutation

www.intechopen.com
104 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

Reproduction is a process in which individual strings are copied according to their pay-off
function values, which can be thought of as a measure of profit, utility or goodness that we
want to maximize. This means that copying strings according to their fitness values will give
strings with higher fitness value a higher probability of generating one or more offspring in
the following generation. So the reproduction operator is simply makes one or more copies
of any individual that posses a high fitness value in the current generation to the next
generation; otherwise, the individual is eliminated from the solution pool.
Crossover is the second operator (also known as the recombination). This operator selects
two individuals within the generation and a crossover site and performs a swapping
operation of the string bits to the right hand side of the crossover site of both individuals.
The crossover operator serves two complementary search functions. First, it provides new
points for further testing within the hyperplanes already represented in the population.
Second, crossover introduces representatives of new hyperpalnes into the population, which
is not represented by either parent structure. Thus, the probability of a better performing
offspring is greatly enhanced.
Mutation is the third operator. This operator acts as a background operator and is used to
explore some of the unvisited points in the search space by randomly flipping a bit in a
population of strings. Since frequent application of this operator would lead to a completely
random search, a very low probability is usually assigned to its activation. Mutation is
needed because, although reproduction and crossover effectively search and recombine
information contained in the strings, occasionally they may fail and lose some potentially
useful genetic material (1 or 0 at particular locations in the case of binary coding). In
artificial genetic systems, the mutation operator protects against such an irrecoverable loss.
In the simple GA, mutation is the occasional (with small probability) random alteration of
the value of a string position. When used randomly with reproduction and cross over, it is a
guaranty against early loss of important notions.

4.5 Parameters settings and selection

Based on the results of the fitness evaluation step, certain individuals of the population are
selected for further processing. The selection is based on a predetermined threshold of
fitness level. The selection of chromosomes for applying various GA operators is based on
their scaled fitness function in accordance to the roulette wheel selection rule. The roulette
wheel slots are sized according to the accumulated probabilities of reproducing each
chromosome.
The search for the optimal GA parameters setting is a very complex task. To achieve good
performance of the GA, many experiments for the system under study must be performed
to get the most suitable parameters for a specific problem. An adaptive scheme to control
the probability rate of performing the crossover and mutation operators is designed.
The crossover rate controls the frequency with which the crossover operator is applied. The
higher the crossover rate, the more quickly new structures are introduced into the
population. If the crossover rate is too high, high-performance structures are discarded
faster than selection can produce improvements. If the crossover rate is too low, the search
may stagnate due to the lower exploration rate.

www.intechopen.com
Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems 105

Mutation is a secondary search operator, which increases the variability of the population. A
low level of mutation serves to prevent any given bit position from remaining forever
converged to a single value in the entire population, and consequently increases the
probability of entrapment at local minima. A high level of mutation yields an essentially
random search, which may lead to very slow convergence.

4.6 Constraints handling (Repair mechanism)

Constraints handling techniques for the GAs can be grouped into a few categories. One way
is to generate a solution without considering the constraints but to include them with
penalty factors in the fitness function.
Another category is based on the application of a special repair algorithm to correct any
infeasible solution so generated.
The third approach concentrates on the use of special representation mappings (decoders),
which guarantee (or at least increase the probability of) the generation of a feasible solution
or the use of problem-specific operators, which preserve feasibility of the solutions.
However, due to applying the crossover and mutation operations the some constraints
might be violated. A mechanism to restore the feasibility is applied according to the
problem under study.

4.7 Merits and demerits

The GA technique has the following advantages:
GAs work with a coding of the parameters of the function they optimize, not the

parameters themselves.

GAs search from a group (population) of points, not a single point.

GAs use penalty (objective function) information, not auxiliary knowledge such as

derivatives or other information.

GAs use probabilistic transition rules, not deterministic rules.
The followings are some of the shortcomings of the GA technique:

GAs do not work for large problems due to stochastic algorithm

Its convergence depend on problem specific parameters that are not clearly defined
It suffers from convergence and computational requirements

4.8 A general Genetic algorithm

A genetic search starts with a randomly generated initial population within which each
individual is evaluated by means of a fitness function. Individuals in this and subsequent
generations are duplicated or eliminated according to their fitness values. Further
generations are created by applying GA operators. This eventually leads to a generation of
high performing individuals.
The followings are the major steps of a basic general GA for any optimization problem:
Step 1. Select a suitable coding of the parameters in the problem under study.

www.intechopen.com
106 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

Step 2. Initialize a population of chromosomes.

Step 3. Evaluate each chromosome in the population.
Step 4. Create new chromosomes by mating current chromosomes; apply mutation and
recombination as the parent chromosomes mate.
Step 5. Delete members of the population to make room for the new chromosomes.
Step 6. Evaluate the new chromosomes and insert them into the population.
Step 7. If the termination criterion is satisfied, stop and return the best chromosomes;
otherwise, go to Step (3).

5. Unit commitment solution using Genetic algorithms approach

5.1 Overview
Many GA implementations for the UCP are proposed in the literature. They differ from each
other in three respects. First, the UCP solution coding which could be binary or real or mix
between binary and real representations. Second, the fitness function could include, in
addition to total operating cost, penalty terms for constraints violations or without penalty
terms. Third, the GA operators are also differing from one implementation to another. Some
algorithms used the basic GA operators only, while others used special operators in order to
enhance the solution and speed up the convergence.
Generally speaking the GA for the UCP starts by coding the variables, randomly selecting
several initial values, calculating the resultant objective function by solving the EDP based
on the UCP decision variables, selecting a subset of the initially selected variables based on
highest savings, cross mating the coded locations and mutating the resultant code to arrive
at a better solution.
The major steps of the GA as applied to the UCP could be summarized as follows (Fig (5.1)):
Creating an initial population by randomly generating a set of feasible solutions

(chromosomes).

Evaluating each chromosome by solving the economic dispatch problem.

Determining the fitness function for each chromosome in the population.

Applying GA operators to generate new populations as follows:

Copy the best solution from the current to the new population
Generate new members (typically 1-10% of the population size), as neighbors to

solutions in the current population, and add them to the new population.

Apply the crossover operator to complete the members of the new population.
Apply the mutation operator to the new population.
In the following sections, the implementations of the different components of the GA for the
UCP are presented.

5.2 Solution coding

Since the UCP lends itself to the binary coding in which a zero denotes the OFF state and a one
represents the ON state, most of the published works used the binary coding [129-140]. The
UCP solution is represented by a binary matrix (U) of dimension TxN (Fig.(5.2-a)). A candidate
solution in the GA could then be represented by a string whose length is the product of the

www.intechopen.com
Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems 107

scheduling periods and the number of generating units TxN. In the GA a number of these
solutions, equal to the population size (NPOP), is stored. The required storage size is then
equal to NPOPxTxN, which is a large value even for a moderate size system.

Start

Read the data and initialize the variables of GA

Generate randomly the initial population of the GA , and

let it be the current population

Calculate the objective function for the current population

members, by solving the EDP.

Calculate and scale the fitness functions for the current

population members.

Is Yes
the convergence Stop
criteria
satisfied?
No

Copy the best members(KB) in the current population to

the new population

Use the rules of generating randomly feasible solutions to

generate new members (KN) in the new population, as
neighbors to randomly selected members in the current
population

Apply the crossover operation to the current population to

complete the new population members

Apply the mutation operation to the members of the new

population

Let the current population be the new population

Fig. 5.1. Flow char of the GA for the UCP

www.intechopen.com
108 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

Another method of coding presented is based on a mix between a binary number and its
equivalent decimal number [141-142]. Each column vector of length T in the solution matrix
(which represents the operation schedule of one unit) is converted to its equivalent decimal
number. The solution matrix is then converted into one row vector (chromosome) of N
decimal numbers, (U1, U2,....UN); each represents the schedule of one unit as shown in
Fig.(5.2-b). Typically the numbers U1, U2, ..,UN are integers ranging between 0 and 2 N 1 .
Accordingly, a population of size NPOP can be stored in a matrix of dimension NPOPxN as
arbitrarily shown in Fig.(5.2-c). Hence, the proposed method requires only 1/T of the
storage required if a normal binary coding is used.

Unit Number
HR
1 2 3 4 . . . N
1 1 0 0 . . . 1
1
1 1 0 0 . . . 1
2
1 0 1 0 . . . 0
3
. . . . . . . .
.
. . . . . . . .
.
0 1 0 1 . . . 0
T

Fig. 5.2-a. The binary solution matrix U

U1 U2 U3 U4 . . . UN
Fig. 5.2-b. The equivalent decimal vector (1xN) (One chromosome)

23 14 45 56 . . . 62
34 52 72 18 . . . 91

. . . . . . . .

51 36 46 87 . . . 21

Fig. 5.2-c. Population of size NPOPxN (NPOP chromosomes)

5.3 Fitness function

Unlike the previous solutions of the UCP using GA [129-140], the fitness function is taken as
the reciprocal of the total operating cost in (3.1), where all new generated solutions are
feasible.

The fitness function is then scaled to prevent the premature convergence. Linear scaling is
used. This requires a linear relationship between the original fitness function (f) and the
scaled one ( fs ) as follows [4]:

fs af b (5.2)

www.intechopen.com
Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems 109

a (c 1)fav / (fmax fmin ) (5.3)

b (1 a)fav (5.4)

Where: c: is a parameter between 1.2 and 2,

fmax , fmin , fav : are maximum, minimum and average values of the original fitness
functions respectively.

5.4 Selection
The selection of chromosomes for applying various GA operators is based on their scaled
fitness function in accordance to the roulette wheel selection rule. The roulette wheel slots
are sized according to the accumulated probabilities of reproducing each chromosome.

5.5 Crossover
To speed up the calculations, the crossover operation is performed between two
chromosomes in their decimal form. A two points crossover operation is used. The
following steps are applied to perform the crossover operation:
Select two parents according to the roulette wheel rule.
Select randomly two positions in the two chromosomes.
Exchange the bits between the two selected positions in the two parents to produce two
children (Fig. (5.3)).
Decode the two children into their binary equivalent and check for reserve constraints
violation.
If the reserve constraints are not satisfied apply the repair mechanism (described in Section
4.6) to restore feasibility of the produced children.

12 34 45 62 93 72 82 32

52 81 69 55 26 38 57 76
Two Parents
12 34 69 55 26 72 82 32

52 81 45 62 93 38 57 76
Two children
Fig. 5.3. Two points cross over example

5.6 Mutation
The crossover operation explained in the last section is not enough for creating a completely
new solution. The reason is that it exchanges the schedule of units as black boxes among

www.intechopen.com
110 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

different chromosomes without applying any changes in the schedules of the units
themselves.
Two new types of mutation operators are introduced to create changes in the units
schedules [141-142]. The mutation operation is applied after reproducing all the new
population members. It is done by applying the probability test to the members of the new
population one by one. The mutation operation is then applied to the selected chromosome.
The details of the two mutation operators are described in the following sections.

5.6.1 Mutation operator (1)

The first mutation operator is implemented as follows:
1. Select a chromosome as explained before and decode it into its binary equivalent.
2. Pick randomly a unit number and a time period.
3. Apply the rules in Section 2.4 to reverse the status of this unit keeping the feasibility of
the unit constraints related to its minimum up/down times.
4. For the changed time periods, check the reserve constraints.
5. If the reserve constraints are violated, apply the proposed correction mechanism and go
to the next step, otherwise go to the next step.
6. Decode the modified solution matrix from binary to decimal form and update the new
population.

5.6.2 Mutation operator (2)

The second mutation operator is based on a local search algorithm to perform fine-tuning on
some of the chromosomes in the new generated population. The selection of chromosomes
for applying this type of mutation could be random or based on the roulette wheel method.
1. The local search algorithm steps are described in details as follows:
2. Decode the selected chromosome into its binary form.
3. Sort the time periods in a descending order according to the difference between the
committed units capacity and the load demand.
4. Identify the time periods at which the committed units capacity is greater than 10%
above the load plus the desired reserve. These time periods have a surplus of
committed power capacity.
5. At the time periods of surplus capacity, sort the committed units in an ascending order
according to their percentage loading.
6. Identify the units that have a percentage loading less than 20% above their minimum
output limits. These units are the costlier units among the committed units in the
respective time periods, since they are lightly loaded.
7. Take the time periods, according to their order found in (2) and consider switching off
the underloaded units one at a time, according to their order.
8. Check the feasibility of the solution obtained. If it is feasible, go to Step (8), otherwise go
to Step (6).
9. Calculate the objective function of the solution obtained by solving the economic
dispatch problem for the changed time periods.
10. Decode the new solution obtained to its decimal equivalent and replace the old one in
the new population.

www.intechopen.com
Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems 111

5.7 Adaptive GA operators

The search for the optimal GA parameters setting is a very complex task. To achieve good
performance of the GA, an adaptive scheme to control the probability rate of performing the
crossover and mutation operators is designed.
The crossover rate controls the frequency with which the crossover operator is applied. The
higher the crossover rate, the more quickly new structures are introduced into the
population. If the crossover rate is too high, high-performance structures are discarded
faster than selection can produce improvements. If the crossover rate is too low, the search
may stagnate due to the lower exploration rate. In our implementation, the crossover rate is
initialized with a high value (typically between 0.6 and 0.8) and is then decreased during the
search according to the convergence rate of the algorithm (decrement value is 0.01).
Mutation is a secondary search operator, which increases the variability of the population. A
low level of mutation serves to prevent any given bit position from remaining forever
converged to a single value in the entire population, and consequently increases the
probability of entrapment at local minima. A high level of mutation yields an essentially
random search, which may lead to very slow convergence. To guide the search, the
mutation rate starts at a low value (between 0.2 and 0.5) then it is incremented by 0.01 as the
algorithm likely converged to a local minimum.

6. Numerical examples
In order to test the proposed algorithm, three systems are considered. Preliminary
experiments have been performed on the three systems to find the most suitable GA
parameters settings. The following control parameters have been chosen after running a
number of simulations: population size=50, initial value of crossover rate=0.8, decrement
value of crossover=0.01, initial value of mutation rate=0.2, increment value of
mutation=0.01, local search mutation rate=0.1, elite copies=2, and the maximum number of
generations=1000.
Different experiments were carried out to investigate the effect of the local search mutation
on the results. It was found that the proposed algorithm with local search performs better
than the simple GA without local search , in terms of both solution quality and number of
iterations.
Table(6.1) presents the comparison of results obtained in the literature (LR and IP) for
Examples 1 and 2.
Fig.(6.1) shows progress in the best objective function versus the generation number. The
algorithm converges after about 400 generations, which is relatively fast.
Tables (6.2), (6.3) and (6.4) show detailed results for Example 1 [4.29]. Table (6.2) shows the
load sharing among the committed units in the 24 hours. Table (6.3) gives the hourly load
demand and the corresponding economic dispatch costs, start-up costs, and total operating
cost. Table (5.4) presents the final schedule of the 24 hours, given in Table (6.2), in the form
of its equivalent decimal numbers.
Tables (6.5), to (6.8) also present the detailed results for Example 3 with a total operating
cost of $661439.8

www.intechopen.com
112 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

Example LR [29] IP [41] GA

Total Cost ($) 1 540895 - 537372
,, 2 - 60667 59491
% Saving 1 - 0.65
,, 2 - 1.93
Generations No 1 - 411
,, 2 - 393

Table 6.1. Comparison between LR, IP, and the proposed GA

6.0E+5
Objective Function ($)

5.8E+5

5.6E+5

5.4E+5

5.2E+5

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Generation Number

Fig. 6.1. Convergence of the proposed GA

www.intechopen.com
Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems 113

Unit Number**
HR
2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10
1 400.0 0.0 0.0 185.0 0.0 350.3 0.0 89.7
2 395.4 0.0 0.0 181.1 0.0 338.4 0.0 85.2
3 355.4 0.0 0.0 168.7 0.0 301.0 0.0 75.0
4 333.1 0.0 0.0 161.8 0.0 280.1 0.0 75.0
5 400.0 0.0 0.0 185.0 0.0 350.3 0.0 89.7
6 400.0 0.0 295.7 200.0 0.0 375.0 0.0 129.3
7 400.0 0.0 343.0 200.0 0.0 375.0 507.0 145.0
8 400.0 295.6 396.7 200.0 0.0 375.0 569.9 162.8
9 400.0 468.1 420.0 200.0 0.0 375.0 768.0 218.9
10 400.0 444.6 420.0 200.0 358.1 375.0 741.1 211.3
11 400.0 486.3 420.0 200.0 404.9 375.0 789.0 224.9
12 400.0 514.1 420.0 200.0 436.1 375.0 820.9 233.9
13 400.0 479.4 420.0 200.0 397.1 375.0 781.0 222.6
14 400.0 389.0 420.0 200.0 295.6 375.0 677.2 193.2
15 400.0 310.1 410.8 200.0 250.0 375.0 586.6 167.5
16 400.0 266.6 368.3 200.0 250.0 375.0 536.7 153.4
17 400.0 317.3 417.9 200.0 250.0 375.0 594.9 169.9
18 400.0 458.5 420.0 200.0 373.7 375.0 757.0 215.8
19 400.0 486.3 420.0 200.0 404.9 375.0 789.0 224.9
20 400.0 0.0 420.0 200.0 442.2 375.0 827.2 235.7
21 400.0 0.0 404.9 200.0 0.0 375.0 579.6 165.6
22 400.0 0.0 0.0 200.0 0.0 375.0 675.0 0.0
23 400.0 0.0 0.0 191.6 0.0 370.1 338.2 0.0
24 377.6 0.0 0.0 175.6 0.0 321.8 275.0 0.0

**Units 1,5 are OFF all hours.

Table 6.2. Power sharing (MW) of Example 1

www.intechopen.com
114 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

HR LOAD ED-COST ST-COST T-COST

1 1025 9670.04 0.00 9670.04
2 1000 9446.62 0.00 9446.62
3 900 8560.91 0.00 8560.91
4 850 8123.13 0.00 8123.13
5 1025 9670.04 0.00 9670.04
6 1400 13434.10 1705.97 15140.00
7 1970 19217.70 2659.11 21876.80
8 2400 23815.50 2685.07 26500.60
9 2850 28253.90 0.00 28253.90
10 3150 31701.70 3007.58 34709.30
11 3300 33219.80 0.00 33219.80
12 3400 34242.10 0.00 34242.10
13 3275 32965.50 0.00 32965.50
14 2950 29706.30 0.00 29706.30
15 2700 27259.70 0.00 27259.70
16 2550 25819.80 0.00 25819.80
17 2725 27501.60 0.00 27501.60
18 3200 32205.70 0.00 32205.70
19 3300 33219.80 0.00 33219.80
20 2900 28899.00 0.00 28899.00
21 2125 20698.40 0.00 20698.40
22 1650 15878.20 0.00 15878.20
23 1300 12572.80 0.00 12572.80
24 1150 11232.00 0.00 11232.00
Total operating cost = $537371.94
Table 6.3. Load demand and hourly costs ($) of Example 1

Unit Number
1,6 2,7 3,8 4,9 5,10

0 16777215 524160 2097120 0

16777215 1048064 16777215 16777152 2097151
Table 6.4. The UCT of Example 1 in its equivalent decimal form (best chromosome)

www.intechopen.com
Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems 115

Unit Number
HR
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 76.00 54.80 15.20
2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 76.00 50.00
3 2.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 28.40 15.20
4 2.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 15.20 15.20
5 2.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 58.40 15.20
6 2.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 76.00 76.00 66.40 15.20
7 0.00 0.00 2.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
8 0.00 0.00 2.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
9 0.00 0.00 2.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
10 0.00 0.00 2.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
11 0.00 0.00 2.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
12 0.00 0.00 2.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
13 0.00 0.00 2.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
14 0.00 0.00 2.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
19 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 76.00 76.00 76.00 64.10
24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.20 15.20 15.20 15.20

Table 6.5. Power sharing (MW) of Example 3 (units 1-13)

www.intechopen.com
116 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

Unit Number
HR
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

1 0.00 0.00 0.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
2 0.00 0.00 0.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
3 0.00 0.00 0.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
4 0.00 0.00 0.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 343.20 350.00 350.00
5 0.00 0.00 0.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
6 0.00 0.00 0.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
7 0.00 0.00 69.60 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
8 0.00 100.00 100.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.65 150.65 68.95 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.0
9 100.00 100.00 100.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 197.00 122.60 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
10 100.00 100.00 100.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 197.00 122.60 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
11 100.00 100.00 100.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 197.00 142.60 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
12 100.00 100.00 100.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 197.00 102.60 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
13 100.00 100.00 100.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 197.00 112.60 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
14 100.00 100.00 100.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 197.00 92.60 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
15 100.00 100.00 100.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 153.05 68.95 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
16 100.00 100.00 34.10 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 68.95 68.95 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
17 100.00 100.00 78.10 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 68.95 68.95 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
18 100.00 100.00 100.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 137.05 68.95 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
19 100.00 100.00 100.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 197.00 109.00 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
20 100.00 100.00 100.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 197.00 149.00 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
21 100.00 100.00 100.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 197.00 129.00 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
22 100.00 100.00 100.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 137.05 68.95 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
23 0.00 25.00 25.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 68.95 68.95 0.00 350.00 350.00 350.00
24 0.00 25.00 25.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 155.00 68.95 68.95 0.00 331.30 350.00 350.00

Table 6.6. Power sharing (MW) of Example 3 (units 14-26)

www.intechopen.com
Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems 117

HR LOAD ED-COST ST-COST T-COST

1 1.82E+03 1.79E+04 0.00E+00 1.79E+04
2 1.80E+03 1.76E+04 0.00E+00 1.76E+04
3 1.72E+03 1.66E+04 0.00E+00 1.66E+04
4 1.70E+03 1.63E+04 0.00E+00 1.63E+04
5 1.75E+03 1.70E+04 0.00E+00 1.70E+04
6 1.91E+03 1.93E+04 1.60E+02 1.94E+04
7 2.05E+03 2.17E+04 1.00E+02 2.18E+04
8 2.40E+03 2.98E+04 7.00E+02 3.05E+04
9 2.60E+03 3.42E+04 1.00E+02 3.43E+04
10 2.60E+03 3.42E+04 0.00E+00 3.42E+04
11 2.62E+03 3.46E+04 0.00E+00 3.46E+04
12 2.58E+03 3.37E+04 0.00E+00 3.37E+04
13 2.59E+03 3.39E+04 0.00E+00 3.39E+04
14 2.57E+03 3.35E+04 0.00E+00 3.35E+04
15 2.50E+03 3.18E+04 0.00E+00 3.18E+04
16 2.35E+03 2.87E+04 0.00E+00 2.87E+04
17 2.39E+03 2.92E+04 0.00E+00 2.92E+04
18 2.48E+03 3.12E+04 0.00E+00 3.12E+04
19 2.58E+03 3.35E+04 0.00E+00 3.35E+04
20 2.62E+03 3.44E+04 0.00E+00 3.44E+04
21 2.60E+03 3.40E+04 0.00E+00 3.40E+04
22 2.48E+03 3.12E+04 0.00E+00 3.12E+04
23 2.15E+03 2.47E+04 0.00E+00 2.47E+04
24 1.90E+03 2.14E+04 0.00E+00 2.14E+04
Total operating cost = 661439.8125
Table 6.7. Load demand and hourly costs ($) of Example 3

Unit Number
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
60 0 16320 0 0 0 0
0 65535 16777184 16777185 16777215 16777215 4194048
16777088 16777152 16777215 16777215 16777215 16777215 16777088
16777088 0 16777215 16777215 16777215

Table 6.8. The UCT of Example 3 in its equivalent decimal form(best chromosome)

www.intechopen.com
118 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

7. Summary
GA is one of the most powerful techniques for solving optimization problems and the UCP
as well. The major components of the GA as applied to the UCP, which are different from
one implementation to another, are: First, the UCP solution coding which could be binary,
real or mix between binary and real representations. Second, the fitness function, which is
basically, the total operating costs with or without adding penalty terms for constraints
violations. Third, the GA operators: reproduction, crossover and mutation in addition to
special operators that might be used to improve the solution speed and quality.
Discussions of the available GA implementations, as applied to the UCP, are summarized.
A complete GA implementation as applied to the UCP is presented. The features of the
presented algorithm are: First, the UCP solution is coded using a mix between binary and
decimal representations. Second, the fitness function is based only on the total operating
cost and no penalties are included. Third, to improve the fine local tuning capabilities of the
proposed GA, a special mutation operator based on a local search procedure, is designed.

8. List of abbreviations
UC Unit Commitment
UCP Unit Commitment Problem
EDP Economic Dispatch Problem
Gas: Genetic Algorithms
GA: Genetic Algorithm
NN Neural Networks
SA: Simulated Annealing
TS: Tabu Search
DP Dynamic Programming
LR Lagrangian Relaxation
IP Integer Programming
MIP Mixed Integer Programming
PL Priority List
ES Expert Systems
HR Hour
MW Mega Watt

9. Nomenclature
The following notations are used throughout the thesis:

A i , Bi ,Ci Cost function parameters of unit i ($/ MW 2 .HR, $/MW.HR, $/HR)

Di , Ei Start-up cost coefficients for unit ($).
Fit (Pit ) Production cost of unit i at time t ($/HR).
FT Total operating cost over the scheduling horizon ($)
Fik The total operating cost for a current solution i at iteration k
N Number of available generating units.

www.intechopen.com
Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems 119

Pit Output power from unit i at time t (MW).

Pik Output power from all units for a current solution i iteration k.
Pmini Unit i minimum generation limit (MW).
Pmax i Unit i maximum generation limit (MW).
PD t System peak demand at hour t (MW).
Rt System reserve at hour t (MW).
STit Start-up cost of unit i at hour t.
SHit Shut-down cost of unit i at hour t.
Soi Unit i cold start-up cost .
T Scheduling time horizon, (24 HRs).
Tupi Unit i minimum up time.
Tdowni Unit i minimum down time.
Toni Duration during which unit i is continuously ON.
Toffi Duration during which unit i is continuously OFF.
Tshuti Instant of shut down of a unit i.
Tstarti Instant of start-up of a unit i.
U(0, 1) The uniform distribution with parameters 0, and 1
U it Unit i status at hour t.
= 1 if the unit is ON and 0 if OFF at hour t.
U ik Unit status matrix for a current solution i at iteration k.
Vit Unit i start-up status at hour t.
= 1 if the unit is started at hour t and 0 otherwise.
Vik Unit start-up/shut-down matrix for a current solution i at iteration k
Wit Unit i shut-down status at hour t.
= 1 if the unit is turned off at hour t and 0 otherwise

10. References
[1] Allen J. Wood and B. F. Wollenberg, Power Generation, Operation, and Control, John
Wiley & Sons Ltd. 1984.
[2] M. E. El-Hawary and G. S. Christensen, Optimal Economic Operation of Electric Power
Systems, Academic Press, Inc. 1979.
[3] J. Nagrath and D. P. Koathari, Modern Power System Analysis, TATA McGraw Hill
Publishing Co., 1987.
[4] D. E. Goldberg, Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization and Machine Learning,
Reading, Mass., Addison Wesely, 1989.
[5] L. Davis (Ed), Handbook of Genetic Algorithms, Van Nostrand, N. York, 1991.
[6] P. G. Lowery, Generating Unit Commitment by Dynamic Programming, IEEE Trans.
on PAS-85, No. 5, Page(s): 422-426, May 1966.

www.intechopen.com
120 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

[7] W. L. Snyder, H. D. Powell, and J. C. Rayburn, "Dynamic Programming Approach to

Unit Commitment", IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, Volume PWRS-2, No. 2, May
1987, Page(s): 339-350.
[8] Mantawy A. H., Optimal Scheduling of Thermal Generation in Electric Power
Systems, A Master Thesis, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt, 1988.
[9] G. B. Sheble, and G. N. Fahd, Unit Commitment Literature Synopsis, IEEE Trans. on
Power Systems, Volume 9, No. 1, February 1994, Page(s): 128-135.
[10] Merlin, and P. Sandrin, A New Method for Unit Commitment At Electricite De
France, IEEE Trans. on PAS, Volume PAS-102, No. 5, May 1983, Page(s): 1218-
1225.
[11] J. F. Bard, Short-Term Scheduling of Thermal-Electric Generators Using Lagrangian
Relaxation, Operation Research, Volume 36, No. 5, September-October 1988,
Page(s): 756-766.
[12] S. J. Wang, S. M. Shahidehpour, D. S. Kirschen, S. Mokhtari, and G. D. Irisarri, Short-
Term Generation Scheduling With Transmission and Environmental Constraints
Using An Augmented Lagrangian Relaxation, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems
Volume 10, No. 3, August 1995, Page(s): 1294-1301.
[13] R. Zhu, C. Fu, and S. Rahamn, Network Programming Technique for Unit
Commitment, Electrical Power & Energy Systems, Volume 17, No. 2, Page(s): 123-
127, 1995.
[14] S. Takriti, J. R. Birge, and E. Long, A Stochastic Model for Unit Commitment Problem,
A New Decomposition Framework, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, Volume 11,
No. 3, August 1996, Page(s): 1497-1508.
[15] Ma, H.; Shahidehpour, S.M.; "Unit commitment with transmission security and voltage
constraints", IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Volume: 14, Issue: 2, May 1999,
Page(s): 757 764.
[16] Motto, A.L.; Galiana, F.D.; "Equilibrium of auction markets with unit commitment: the
need for augmented pricing", IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Volume:
17, Issue: 3, Aug. 2002, Page(s): 798-805.
[17] Momoh, J.A.; Jizhong Zhu; "Optimal generation scheduling based on AHP/ANP", IEEE
Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part B, Volume: 33, Issue: 3, June
2003, Page(s): 531-535.
[18] Jing Wang; Redondo, N.E.; Galiana, F.D.;" Demand-side reserve offers in joint
energy/reserve electricity markets", IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Volume:
18, Issue: 4, Nov. 2003, Page(s): 1300 1306.
[19] F. N. Lee, "Short-Term Thermal Unit Commitment -- A New Method", IEEE Trans. on
Power Systems, Volume 3, No. 2, May 1988, Page(s): 421-428
[20] S. Mokhtari, J. Singh, and B. Wollenberg, A Unit Commitment Expert System, IEEE
Trans. on Power Systems, Volume 3, No. 1, February 1988, Page(s): 272-277.
[21] Z. Ouyang, and S. M. Shahidepour, Short-Term Unit Commitment Expert System ,
Electric Power System Research, 20 (1990) 1-13.
[22] Ronne-Hansen, P.; Ronne-Hansen, J. "Neural networks as a tool for unit commitment",
Proceedings of the First International Forum on Applications of Neural Networks
to Power Systems, 1991, Page(s): 266 270.

www.intechopen.com
Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems 121

[23] Ouyang, Z.; Shahidehpour, S.M. "A hybrid artificial neural network-dynamic
programming approach to unit commitment", IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, Volume: 7, No.1, Feb. 1992, Page(s): 236 242.
[24] Sasaki, H.; Watanabe, M.; Kubokawa, J.; Yorino, N.; Yokoyama, R. "A solution method
of unit commitment by artificial neural networks", IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, Volume: 7, No. 3, Aug. 1992, Page(s): 974981.
[25] Walsh, M.P.; O'Malley, M.J., "Augmented Hopfield network for unit commitment and
economic dispatch", IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Volume: 12 4, Nov. 1997,
Page(s): 1765 1774.
[26] M. E El-Hawary, applications of artificial neural networks in electric power systems
operational plannibg, Engineering Intelligent Systems, Vol. 7, No. 1, March 1999,
Page(s): 49-61.
[27] Zhuang, F.; Galiana, F.D. "Unit commitment by simulated annealing", IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, Volume: 5, No. 1, Feb. 1990, Page(s): 311-318.
[28] Mantawy, A.H.; Abdel-Magid, Y.L.; Selim, S.Z., "A simulated annealing algorithm for
unit commitment", IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Volume: 13, No.1, Feb.
1998, Page(s): 197 204.
[29] Mori, H.; Usami, T. "Unit commitment using Tabu search with restricted
neighborhood", International Conference on Intelligent Systems Applications to
Power Systems, 1996. Proceedings, ISAP'96, Page(s): 422 427.
[30] Mantawy, A.H.; Abdel-Magid, Y.L.; Selim, S.Z. "Unit commitment by tabu search ",
Generation, Transmission and Distribution, IEE Proceedings- Volume: 145, No. 1,
Page(s). 1998, Page(s): 5664.
[31] Zbigniew Michalewicz, Genetic Algorithms + Data Structures = Evolution Programs,
Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg New York, 1992.
[32] John J. Grefenstette, and James E. Baker, How Genetic Algorithm Work: A Critical
Look At Implicit Parallelism, The Proceedings of The Third International
Conference on Genetic Algorithms, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo,
California, 1989.
[33] David E. Goldberg, K. Deb and James H. Clark, Genetic Algorithms, Noise, and the
Sizing of Populations, Complex systems 6 (1992) 333-362.
[34] K. S. Tang, K. F. Man, S. Kwong and Q. He, "Genetic algorithms and their applications",
IEEE Signal processing magazines, Issue: November 1996, Page(s): 2237.
[35] Dasgupta, D.; McGregor, D.R.; "Short term unit-commitment using genetic algorithms",
Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Tools with Artificial
Intelligence, TAI '93, 8-11 Nov. 1993, Page(s): 240247
[36] Hong-Tzer Yang; Pai-Chuan Yang; Ching-Lien Huang; "Applications of the genetic
algorithm to the unit commitment problem in power generation industry",
Proceedings of the IEEE International Joint Conference of the Fourth IEEE
International Conference on Fuzzy Systems and The Second International Fuzzy
Engineering Symposium, Volume: 1, 20-24 March 1995, Page(s): 267274.
[37] Hong-Tzer Yang; Pai-Chuan Yang; Ching-Lien Huang; "Optimization of unit
commitment using parallel structures of genetic algorithm", Proceedings of the
International Conference on Energy Management and Power Delivery, EMPD '95,
Volume: 2, 21-23 Nov. 1995, Page(s): 577-582.

www.intechopen.com
122 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

[38] X. Ma, A. A. El-Keib, R. E. Smith, and H. Ma, A Genetic Algorithm Based Approach to
Thermal Unit Commitment of Electric Power Systems, Electric Power Systems
Research 34 (1995) 29-36.
[39] S. A. Kazarilis, A. G. Bakirtzis, and V. Petridis, A Genetic Algorithm Solution to the
Unit Commitment Problem, IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, Volume 11, No. 1,
February 1996, Page(s): 83-92.
[40] Pai-Chuan Yang, Hong-Tzer Yang, and Ching-Lien Huang, Solving the Unit
Commitment Problem With A Genetic Algorithm Through A Constraint
Satisfaction Technique, Electric Power Systems Research 37 (1996), 55-65.
[41] S. O. Orero and M. R. Irving, A Genetic Algorithm for Generators Scheduling in Power
Systems, Electric Power & Energy Systems, Volume 18, No. 1, 1996, Page(s): 19-26.
[42] G. B. Sheble, T. T. Maifeld, K. Birttig, G. Fahd, and S. Fukurozaki-Coppinger, Unit
Commitment by Genetic Algorithm With Penalty Methods and A Comparison of
Lagrangian Search and Genetic Algorithm-Economic Dispatch Example, Electric
Power & Energy Systems, Volume 18, No. 6, 1996, Page(s): 339-346.
[43] Maifeld, T.T.; Sheble, G.B.; "Genetic-based unit commitment algorithm"
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Volume: 11, Issue: 3, Aug. 1996, Page(s):
1359-1370.
[44] Arroyo, J.M; Conejo, A.; Jimenez, N., "A genetic algorithm approach to solve the unit
commitment problem", Intelligent System Application to Power Systems (ISAP'97),
July 6-10, 1996, Seoul Korea, Page(s): 182-187.
[45] Mantawy, A.H.; Abdel-Magid, Y.L.; Selim, S.Z. "A new genetic algorithm approach for
unit commitment", Second International Conference On Genetic Algorithms In
Engineering Systems: Innovations and Applications, GALESIA 97, (Conf. Publ. No.
446), 1997, Page(s): 215 -220.
[46] Mantawy, A.H.; Abdel-Magid, Y.L.; Selim, S.Z. "A genetic algorithm with local search
for unit commitment", Intelligent System Application to Power Systems (ISAP'97),
July 6-10, 1996, Seoul Korea, Page(s): 170-175.
[47] Zhao Hongwei; Yi Liangting; Wang Buyun; Cheng Gang; Yang Haiping "A new genetic
algorithm for unit commitment", IEEE International Conference on Intelligent
Processing Systems, 1997, ICIPS '97, Volume: 1, Page(s): 606610.
[48] Hong-Tzer Yang; Pai-Chuan Yang; Ching-Lien Huang, "A parallel genetic algorithm
approach to solving the unit commitment problem: implementation on the
transputer networks", IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Volume: 12, No. 2,
May 1997, Page(s): 661 -668
[49] Zhu Mingyu; Cen Wenhui; Wang Mingyou; Zhang Peichao; "Using an enhanced
genetic algorithm to solve the unit commitment problem", IEEE International
Conference on Intelligent Processing Systems, ICIPS 97, Volume: 1, 28-31 Oct. 1997,
Page(s): 611 614.
[50] Juste, K.A.; Kita, H.; Tanaka, E.; Hasegawa, J.; "An evolutionary programming solution
to the unit commitment problem", IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Volume:
14, Issue: 4, Nov. 1999, Page(s): 1452 1459.
[51] Richter, C.W., Jr.; Sheble, G.B.; "A profit-based unit commitment GA for the competitive
environment", IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Volume: 15, Issue: 2, May
2000, Page(s): 715-721.

www.intechopen.com
Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems 123

[52] Christiansen, J.C.; Dortolina, C.A.; Bermudez, J.P.; "An approach to solve the unit
commitment problem using genetic algorithm", IEEE Power Engineering Society
Summer Meeting, 2000, Volume: 1, 16-20 July 2000, Page(s): 261-266.
[53] Senjyu, T.; Yamashiro, H.; Uezato, K.; Funabashi, T.; "A unit commitment problem by
using genetic algorithm based on unit characteristic classification", IEEE Power
Engineering Society Winter Meeting, Volume: 1, 27-31 Jan. 2002, Page(s): 5863.
[54] Swarup, K.S.; Yamashiro, S.; "Unit commitment solution methodology using genetic
algorithm", IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Volume: 17, Issue: 1, Feb. 2002,
Page(s): 87-91.
[55] Haoyong Chen; Xifan Wang; "Cooperative co evolutionary algorithm for unit
commitment", IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Volume: 17, Issue: 1, Feb.
2002, Page(s): 128 33.
[56] Arroyo, J.M.; Conejo, A.J.; "A parallel repair genetic algorithm to solve the unit
commitment problem", IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Volume: 17, Issue:
4, Nov. 2002, Page(s): 1216-1224.
[57] Mashhadi, H.R.; Shanechi, H.M.; Lucas, C.; "A new genetic algorithm with Lamarckian
individual learning for generation scheduling", IEEE Transactions on Power
Systems, Volume: 18, Issue: 3, Aug. 2003, Page(s): 1181-1186.
[58] Hans P. Van Meeteren, Scheduling of Generation and Allocation of Fuel, Using
Dynamic and Linear Programming, IEEE Trans. on Power Apparatus and
Systems, Volume PAS-103, No. 7, July 1984, Page(s): 1562-1568.
[59] K. P. Wong and K. P. Doan, Artificial Intelligence Algorithm for Daily Scheduling of
Thermal Generators, IEE Proc. C, 1991, 138,(6), Page(s): 518-534.
[60] Z. Ouyang, and S. M. Shahidehpour, "An Intelligent Dynamic Programming for Unit
Commitment Application", IEEE Trans. on Power Systems, Volume 6, No. 3,
August 1991, Page(s): 1203-1209.
[61] Z. Ouyang, and S. M. Shahidehpour, "A Hybrid Artificial Neural Network-Dynamic
Programming Approach to Unit Commitment", IEEE Trans. on Power Systems,
Volume 7, No. 1, February 1992, Page(s): 236-242.
[62] G. B. Sheble, and T. T. Maifeld, Unit Commitment by Genetic Algorithm and Expert
System, Electric Power Systems Research 30 (1994) 115-121.
[63] Ruey-Husn, and Yuan-Yih Hsu, A Hybrid Artificial Neural Network-Differential
Dynamic Programming Approach for Short-Term Hydro Scheduling, Electric
Power Systems Research 33 (1995), 77-86.
[64] Khanh Doan and Kit Po Wong, Artificial Intelligence-Based Machine-Learning System
for Thermal Generator Scheduling, IEE Proc. -Gener. Transm. Distrib., Volume
142, No. 2, March 1995, Page(s): 195-201.
[65] S. O. Orero, and M. R. Irving, Scheduling of Generators With A Hybrid Genetic
Algorithm, Genetic Algorithms in Engineering Systems: Innovation and
Applications, IEE Conference, September 1995, Page(s): 200-206.
[66] Mantawy, A.H.; Abdel-Magid, Y.L.; Selim, S.Z. "A new simulated annealing-based tabu
search algorithm for unit commitment", IEEE International Conference on
Computational Cybernetics and Simulation., Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1997.,
Volume: 3, Page(s): 24322437.

www.intechopen.com
124 Genetic Algorithms in Applications

[67] Mantawy, A.H.; Abdel-Magid, Y.L.; Selim, S.Z. "A new genetic-based tabu search
algorithm for unit commitment problem", Journal of Electric Power Systems
Research 49 (1999), Page(s): 71-78.
[68] Mantawy, A.H.; Abdel-Magid, Y.L.; Selim, S.Z.; "Integrating genetic algorithms, tabu
search, and simulated annealing for the unit commitment problem", IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, Volume: 14, Issue: 3, Aug. 1999, Page(s): 829-836.
[69] Mantawy, A.H.; Abdel-Magid, Y.L.; Abido, M.A., " A simulated annealing algorithm for
fuzzy unit commitment problem", IEEE Transmission and Distribution Conference,
1999, Volume: 1, Page(s): 142 -147.
[70] Chuan-Ping Cheng; Chih-Wen Liu; Chun-Chang Liu; "Unit commitment by Lagrangian
relaxation and genetic algorithms", IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Volume:
15, Issue: 2, May 2000, Page(s): 707-714
[71] Mantawy, A.H.; "A genetic-based algorithm for fuzzy unit commitment model", IEEE
Power Engineering Society Summer Meeting, Volume: 1, 16-20 July 2000, Page(s):
250254.
[72] Jimenez-Redondo, N.; Chuan-Ping Cheng; Chih-Wen Liu; Chun-Cheng Liu; "Unit
commitment by Lagrangian relaxation and genetic algorithms [discussion and
closure]", IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Volume: 16, Issue: 4, Nov. 2001,
Page(s): 938 39.
[73] Gwo-Ching Liao; Ta-Peng Tsao; "The use of genetic algorithm/fuzzy system and tabu
search for short-term unit commitment", Proceedings OF the International
Conference on Power System Technology, PowerCon 2002, Volume: 4, 13-17 Oct.
2002, Page(s): 2302 2307.
[74] Rajan, C.C.A.; Mohan, M.R.; Manivannan, K.; "Neural-based tabu search method for
solving unit commitment problem", Generation, Transmission and Distribution,
IEE Proceedings-, Volume: 150, Issue: 4, 14 July 2003 Page(s): 469-474.

www.intechopen.com
 Genetic Algorithms in Applications
Edited by Dr. Rustem Popa

ISBN 978-953-51-0400-1
Hard cover, 328 pages
Publisher InTech
Published online 21, March, 2012
Published in print edition March, 2012

Genetic Algorithms (GAs) are one of several techniques in the family of Evolutionary Algorithms - algorithms
that search for solutions to optimization problems by "evolving" better and better solutions. Genetic Algorithms
have been applied in science, engineering, business and social sciences. This book consists of 16 chapters
organized into five sections. The first section deals with some applications in automatic control, the second
section contains several applications in scheduling of resources, and the third section introduces some
applications in electrical and electronics engineering. The next section illustrates some examples of character
recognition and multi-criteria classification, and the last one deals with trading systems. These evolutionary
techniques may be useful to engineers and scientists in various fields of specialization, who need some
optimization techniques in their work and who may be using Genetic Algorithms in their applications for the first
time. These applications may be useful to many other people who are getting familiar with the subject of
Genetic Algorithms.

How to reference
In order to correctly reference this scholarly work, feel free to copy and paste the following:

Abdel-aal H. Mantawy (2012). Genetic Algorithms Application to Electric Power Systems, Genetic Algorithms in
Applications, Dr. Rustem Popa (Ed.), ISBN: 978-953-51-0400-1, InTech, Available from:
http://www.intechopen.com/books/genetic-algorithms-in-applications/genetic-algorithms-application-to-electric-
power-systems

InTech Europe InTech China

University Campus STeP Ri Unit 405, Office Block, Hotel Equatorial Shanghai
Slavka Krautzeka 83/A No.65, Yan An Road (West), Shanghai, 200040, China
51000 Rijeka, Croatia
Phone: +385 (51) 770 447 Phone: +86-21-62489820
Fax: +385 (51) 686 166 Fax: +86-21-62489821
www.intechopen.com