Probabilistic Multi-Objective Optimal Power Flow: A Grey Wolf Optimizer Approach Considering Load and Wind Turbine Uncertainties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents a novel approach to tackle the challenge of Probabilistic Multi-Objective Optimal Power Flow (PMOOPF) by utilizing the Grey Wolf Optimizer (GWO). The methodology incorporates uncertainties related to both load and wind turbine generation, modeling load uncertainty with a normal distribution and wind speed uncertainty with a Weibull distribution and employs Monte Carlo Simulation (MCS) to establish the probability distribution function (PDF) for both the load and power generated by the hybrid sources. The PMOOPF problem aims to concurrently minimize thermal generation costs, real power losses, and maximize voltage stability. The proposed approach is tested on the IEEE 26-bus system, and the outcomes are compared with the Gravitational Search Algorithm (GSA). The contribution of this paper lies in effectively addressing uncertainties in load and wind turbine generation, incorporating diverse PMOOPF objectives, and employing the GWO optimization technique. The simulation results demonstrate the method's efficacy and efficiency in achieving economic and technical benefits.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".