Passerine swarm optimization algorithm for solving optimal reactive power dispatch problem

International Journal of Advances in Applied Sciences (IJAAS)
Vol. 9, No. 2, June 2020, pp. 101~109
ISSN: 2252-8814, DOI: 10.11591/ijaas.v9.i2.pp101-109  101
Journal homepage: http://ijaas.iaescore.com
Passerine swarm optimization algorithm for solving optimal
reactive power dispatch problem
Lenin Kanagasabai
Department of EEE, Prasad V. Potluri Siddhartha Institute of Technology, India
Article Info ABSTRACT
Article history:
Received Jan 3, 2020
Revised Feb 11, 2020
Accepted Mar 14, 2020
This paper presents Passerine Swarm Optimization Algorithm (PSOA) for
solving optimal reactive power dispatch problem. This algorithm is based on
behaviour of social communications of Passerine bird. Basically, Passerine
bird has three common behaviours: search behaviour, adherence behaviour
and expedition behaviour. Through the shared communications Passerine
bird will search for the food and also run away from hunters. By using
the Passerine bird communications and behaviour, five basic rules have been
created in the PSOA approach to solve the optimal reactive power dispatch
problem. Key aspect is to reduce the real power loss and also to keep
the variables within the limits. Proposed Passerine Swarm Optimization
Algorithm (PSOA) has been tested in standard IEEE 30 bus test system and
simulations results reveal about the better performance of the proposed
algorithm in reducing the real power loss and enhancing the static voltage
stability margin.
Keywords:
Optimal
Passerine bird
Reactive power
Swarm-intelligence
Transmission loss
This is an open access article under the CC BY-SA license.
Corresponding Author:
Lenin Kanagasabai
Department of EEE,
Prasad V. Potluri Siddhartha Institute of Technology,
Kanuru, Vijayawada, Andhra Pradesh-520007, India.
Email: gklenin@gmail.com
1. INTRODUCTION
Optimal reactive power dispatch problem is subject to number of uncertainties and at least in
the best case to uncertainty parameters given in the demand and about the availability equivalent amount of
shunt reactive power compensators. Optimal reactive power dispatch plays a major role for the operation of
power systems, and it should be carried out in a proper manner, such that system reliability is not got
affected. The main objective of the optimal reactive power dispatch is to maintain the level of voltage and
reactive power flow within the specified limits under various operating conditions and network
configurations. By utilizing a number of control tools such as switching of shunt reactive power sources,
changing generator voltages or by adjusting transformer tap-settings the reactive power dispatch can be done.
By doing optimal adjustment of these controls in different levels, the redistribution of the reactive power
would minimize transmission losses. This procedure forms an optimal reactive power dispatch problem and it
has a major influence on secure and economic operation of power systems. Various mathematical techniques
like the gradient method Alsac et al . Lee et al and linear programming mangoli et al [1-7] have been adopted
to solve the optimal reactive power dispatch problem. Both the gradient and Newton methods has the
difficulty in handling inequality constraints. If linear programming is applied then the input- output function
has to be expressed as a set of linear functions which mostly lead to loss of accuracy. This paper formulates
by combining both the real power loss minimization and maximization of static voltage stability margin
(SVSM) as the objectives. Global optimization has received extensive research attention, and a great number

 ISSN: 2252-8814
Int J Adv Appl Sci, Vol. 9, No. 2, June 2020: 101 – 109
102
of methods have been applied to solve this problem. Many Evolutionary algorithms Aparajita Mukherjee
et al., Hu et al., Mahaletchumi et al., Sulaiman et al., Pandiarajan et al.,have been already proposed to solve
the reactive power flow problem. This paper presents Passerine Swarm Optimization Algorithm (PSOA) for
solving optimal reactive power dispatch problem. This algorithm is based on behaviour of social
communications of Passerine bird Anderson et al., Barnard et al., Beauchamp et al., Bednekoff et al., Coolen
et al. [8-13]. Basically Passerine bird has three common behaviours: search behaviour, adherence behaviour
and expedition behaviour. Through the shared communications Passerine bird will search for the food and
also run away from hunters [14-20]. By using the Passerine bird communications and behaviour, five basic
rules have been created in the PSOA approach to solve the optimal reactive power dispatch problem. Key
aspect is to reduce the real power loss and also to keep the variables within the limits. Proposed Passerine
Swarm Optimization Algorithm (PSOA) has been tested in standard IEEE 30 bus test system and simulations
results reveal about the better performance of the proposed algorithm in reducing the real power loss and
enhancing the static voltage stability margin.
2. VOLTAGE STABILITY EVALUATION
odal analysis for voltage stability evaluation; Modal analysis is one among best methods for voltage
stability enhancement in power systems. The steady state system power flow are given by (1).
[
∆P
∆Q
] = [
Jpθ Jpv
Jqθ JQV
] [
∆𝜃
∆𝑉
] (1)
Where
ΔP = Incremental change in bus real power.
ΔQ = Incremental change in bus reactive Power injection
Δθ = incremental change in bus voltage angle.
ΔV = Incremental change in bus voltage Magnitude
Jpθ , JPV , JQθ , JQV jacobian matrix are the sub-matrixes of the System voltage stability is affected by both
P and Q.
To reduce (1), let ΔP = 0 , then.
∆Q = [JQV − JQθJPθ−1JPV]∆V = JR∆V (2)
∆V = J−1
− ∆Q (3)
Where
JR = (JQV − JQθJPθ−1JPV) (4)
JR is called the reduced Jacobian matrix of the system.
Modes of Voltage instability:
Voltage Stability characteristics of the system have been identified by computing the Eigen values and
Eigen vectors.
Let
JR = ξ˄η (5)
Where,
ξ = right eigenvector matrix of JR
η = left eigenvector matrix of JR
∧ = diagonal eigenvalue matrix of JR and
JR−1 = ξ˄−1
η (6)
From (5) and (8), we have
∆V = ξ˄−1
η∆Q (7)
Or

Int J Adv Appl Sci ISSN: 2252-8814 
Passerine swarm optimization algorithm for solving optimal… (Kanagasabai Lenin)
103
∆V = ∑
ξiηi
λi
I ∆Q (8)
Where ξi is the ith column right eigenvector and η the ith row left eigenvector of JR.
λi is the ith Eigen value of JR. The ith modal reactive power variation is,
∆Qmi = Kiξi
(9)
where,
Ki = ∑ ξij2j − 1 (10)
Where
ξji is the jth element of ξi
The corresponding ith modal voltage variation is
∆Vmi = [1 λi⁄ ]∆Qmi (11)
If | λi | =0 then the ith modal voltage will collapse .
In (10), let ΔQ = ek where ek has all its elements zero except the kth one being 1. Then,
∆V = ∑
ƞ1k ξ1
λ1
i (12)
ƞ1k
k th element of ƞ1
V –Q sensitivity at bus k
∂VK
∂QK
= ∑
ƞ1k ξ1
λ1
i = ∑
Pki
λ1
i (13)
3. PROBLEM FORMULATION
The objectives of the reactive power dispatch problem is to minimize the system real power loss and
maximize the static voltage stability margins (SVSM).
3.1. Minimization of real power loss
Minimization of the real power loss (Ploss) in transmission lines is mathematically stated as (14).
Ploss= ∑ gk(Vi
2
+Vj
2
−2Vi Vj cos θij
)
n
k=1
k=(i,j)
(14)
Where n is the number of transmission lines, gk is the conductance of branch k, Vi and Vj are
voltage magnitude at bus i and bus j, and θij is the voltage angle difference between bus i and bus j.
Minimization of Voltage Deviation. Minimization of the voltage deviation magnitudes (VD) at load buses is
mathematically stated as (15).
Minimize VD = ∑ |Vk − 1.0|nl
k=1 (15)
Where nl is the number of load busses and Vk is the voltage magnitude at bus k.
3.2. System constraints
The following is an objective function that experiences constraints.
a. Load flow equality constraints:
PGi – PDi − Vi ∑ Vj
nb
j=1
[
Gij cos θij
+Bij sin θij
] = 0, i = 1,2 … . , nb (16)
QGi − QDi − Vi ∑ Vj
nb
j=1
[
Gij sin θij
+Bij cos θij
] = 0, i = 1,2 … . , nb (17)

 ISSN: 2252-8814
104
where, nb is the number of buses, PG and QG are the real and reactive power of the generator, PD
and QD are the real and reactive load of the generator, and Gij and Bij are the mutual conductance and
susceptance between bus i and bus j.
b. Generator bus voltage (VGi) inequality constraint:
VGi
min
≤ VGi ≤ VGi
max
, i ∈ ng (18)
c. Load bus voltage (VLi) inequality constraint:
VLi
min
≤ VLi ≤ VLi
max
, i ∈ nl (19)
d. Switchable reactive power compensations (QCi) inequality constraint:
QCi
min
≤ QCi ≤ QCi
max
, i ∈ nc (20)
e. Reactive power generation (QGi) inequality constraint:
QGi
min
≤ QGi ≤ QGi
max
, i ∈ ng (21)
f. Transformers tap setting (Ti) inequality constraint:
Ti
min
≤ Ti ≤ Ti
max
, i ∈ nt (22)
g. Transmission line flow (SLi) inequality constraint:
SLi
min
≤ SLi
max
, i ∈ nl (23)
Where, nc, ng and nt are numbers of the switchable reactive power sources, generators and transformers.
4. PASSERINE BIRD SWARM HYPOTHESIS
The Passerine bird Figure 1 social behavior’s can be written as follows:
a) Rule 1. Every Passerine bird has choice to alter between the adherence behaviour and search behaviour.
Whether the Passerine bird searches or in observance, it is molded as a stochastic decision.
b) Rule 2. While search, each Passerine bird can promptly record and renovate its previous most outstanding
experience and the swarms’ previous most outstanding experience about food area. This information has
been used to discover food. Social information is shared rapidly among the whole swarm.
c) Rule 3. During adherence, every Passerine will attempt to move near to the centre of the swarm.
This behaviour can be embroidered by the interference tempted by the rivalry among swarm. The Passerine
with the uppermost reserves would be more prone to lie nearer to the centre of the swarm.
d) Rule 4. While flying Passerine may often change between generating and sponging. The Passerine with
the uppermost reserves would be a creator, while the one with the bottom most reserves would be
a sponger. Passerine have reserves between the uppermost and bottom most reserves would randomly
choose to be creator and sponger.
e) Rule 5. Creators with desire search for food. Spongers would randomly follow a creator to search for food.
By the above Rules the mathematical model for the problem has been developed,
All N virtual Passerine bird, portrayed by their position Z_t^i (i∈[1...,N]) at time step t, search for
food and fly in an organized space.

105
Figure 1. Passerine bird
4.1. Search behaviour
Every Passerine will search for food according to its experience. Rule 2 can be written in (24)
as follows,
𝑍𝑖,𝑗
𝑡+1
= 𝑍𝑖,𝑗
𝑡
+ (𝑘𝑖,𝑗 − 𝑍𝑖,𝑗
𝑡
) × 𝑀 × 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑(0,1) + (𝑙𝑗 − 𝑍𝑖,𝑗
𝑡
) × 𝑁 × 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑(0,1) (24)
Where𝑗 ∈ [1, . . , 𝐶], rand (0, 1) denotes independent uniformly distributed numbers in (0, 1).
M and N are two positive numbers, which can be respectively called as cognitive and social
accelerated coefficients.𝑘𝑖,𝑗is the best preceding position of the ith passerine and 𝑙𝑗is the most excellent
preceding position shared by the swarm.
The Rule 1 can be defined as a stochastic decision. If a uniform arbitrary number in (0, 1) is smaller than,
𝐾(𝐾 ∈ (0,1))a constant value, the Passerine would search for food. Otherwise, the passerine would carry
on observance.
4.2. Adherence behaviour
Rule 3 indicates that passerine would try to move nearthe Centre of the swarm, and they would
inevitably contend with each other. Thus, each Passerine cannot directly move towards the Centre
of the swarm. This drive can be written as follows:
𝑍𝑖,𝑗
𝑡+1
= 𝑍 + 𝐹1(𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑣 − 𝑍𝑖,𝑗
𝑡
) × 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑(0,1) + 𝐹2(𝐾𝑘,𝑗 − 𝑍𝑖,𝑗
𝑡
) × 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑(−1,1) (25)
𝐹1 = 𝑓1 × 𝑒𝑥𝑝 (−
𝑘𝑓𝑖𝑡 𝑖
𝑠𝑢𝑚𝐹𝑖𝑡+𝜀
× 𝑁) (26)
𝐹2 = 𝑓2 × 𝑒𝑥𝑝 ((
𝑘𝐹𝑖𝑡 𝑖−𝑘𝐹𝑖𝑡 𝑟
|𝑘𝐹𝑖𝑡 𝑟−𝑘𝐹𝑖𝑡 𝑖|+𝜀
)
𝑁×𝑘𝐹𝑖𝑡 𝑟
𝑠𝑢𝑚𝐹𝑖𝑡+𝜀
) (27)
Where 𝑘(𝑘 ≠ 1)is a positive integer, which is illogically chosen between 1 and N. f1 and f2 are two
positive constants in [0, 2], 𝑘𝐹𝑖𝑡𝑖denotes the ith passerine best fitness value and sumFit represents the sum of
the swarms’ best fitness value. 1, which is used to keep away from zero-division error, 𝑚𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑣 denotes the jth
element of the average position of the whole swarm. When a Passerine move near the Centre of the swarm, it
will unavoidably compete with each other. The average fitness value of the swarm is measured by
the surrounding swarm when a Passerine move to the Centre of the swarm. Each Passerine always wants to
position at the Centre of swarm, the product of F1 and rand (0, 1) should not be more than 1. Here, F2 is used
to create the direct effect persuaded by interference when a Passerine move to the Centre of the swarm.
If the most outstanding fitness value of a random kth Passerine (k – i) is greater than that of the ith Passerine,
then F2, f2 which means that the ith may bear Passerine a greater interference than the kth Passerine.
The kth Passerine would be move near the centre of the swarm than the ith passerine.

 ISSN: 2252-8814
106
4.3. Expedition behaviour
Passerine may fly to other areas due to countless reasons. When the Passerine arrived at an
innovative site, they would again search for food. Some Passerine as creators would search for food patches,
while other Passerine try to feed from the food patch found by the creators. By the Rule 4 the creators and
spongers can be detached from the swarm. The behaviors of the creators and spongers can be written
as follows:
𝑍𝑖,𝑗
𝑡+1
= 𝑍𝑖,𝑗
𝑡
+ 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑛(0,1) × 𝑍𝑖,𝑗
𝑡
(28)
𝑍𝑖,𝑗
𝑡+1
= 𝑍𝑖,𝑗
𝑡
+ (𝑍 𝑘,𝑗
𝑡
− 𝑍𝑖,𝑗
𝑡
) × 𝐺𝐻 × 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑(0,1) (29)
Where 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑛(0,1) denotes Gaussian distributed arbitrary number with mean zero and standard
deviation 1, 𝑘 ∈ [1,2,3, . . , 𝑁], 𝑘 ≠ 𝑖. 𝐺𝐻(𝐺𝐻 ∈ [0,2])means that the sponger would follow the creator to
search for food. We assume that each Passerine fly to alternative place every GH (positive integer)
unit interval.
4.4. Passerine bird Swarm optimization Algorithm for optimal reactive power dispatch problem
Enter: P: the number of individuals (passerine) bounded in the population, Q: the utmost number of
iterations, GH: the rate of repetition of Passerine expedition behaviors’, K: the probability of searching for
food, M, N, f1, f2, GH: are five constant parameters, 𝑡 = 0 ; Initialize the population
Assessment of the N individuals’ fitness value, and find the most outstanding solution
While (𝑡 < 𝑄)
If (𝑡% 𝐺𝐻 ≠ 0)
For 𝐹𝑜𝑟𝐼 = 1: 𝑁
If 𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑑 (0,1) < 𝐾
At that juncture Passerine searches for food (24)
Else
The Passerine keep surveillance (25)
End if
End for
Else
Classifying swarms as creators and spongers.
For 𝑖 = 1: 𝑁
If 𝑖 is a creator
Then Create (28)
Else
It will be Sponger (29)
End if
End for
End if
Calculate innovative solutions. If the innovative solutions are greater to their previous ones,
renovate them. Find the current most outstanding solution
t=t+1;
End while
Output:
The individual with the finest objective function value in the population
5. SIMULATION RESULTS
The efficiency of the proposed Passerine Swarm Optimization Algorithm (PSOA) method is
demonstrated by testing it on standard IEEE-30 bus system. The IEEE-30 bus system has 6 generator buses,
24 load buses and 41 transmission lines of which four branches are (6-9), (6-10) , (4-12) and (28-27) - are
with the tap setting transformers. The lower voltage magnitude limits at all buses are 0.95 p.u. and the upper
limits are 1.1 for all the PV buses and 1.05 p.u. for all the PQ buses and the reference bus. The simulation
results have been presented in Tables 1, Table 2, Table 3 & Table 4. The Table 5 shows the proposed
algorithm powerfully reduces the real power losses when compared to other given algorithms. The optimal
values of the control variables along with the minimum loss obtained are given in Table 1. Corresponding to
this control variable setting, it was found that there are no limit violations in any of the state variables.
Optimal Reactive Power Dispatch problem together with voltage stability constraint problem was
handled in this case as a multi-objective optimization problem where both power loss and maximum voltage

107
stability margin of the system were optimized simultaneously. Table 2 indicates the optimal values of these
control variables. Also it is found that there are no limit violations of the state variables. It indicates
the voltage stability index has increased from 0.2452 to 0.2466, an advance in the system voltage stability.
To determine the voltage security of the system, contingency analysis was conducted using the control
variable setting obtained in case 1 and case 2. The Eigen values equivalents to the four critical contingencies
are given in Table 3. From this result it is observed that the Eigen value has been improved considerably for
all contingencies in the second case.
Table 1.Results of PSOA – ORPD optimal control variables
Control variables Variable setting
V1
V2
V5
V8
V11
V13
T11
T12
T15
T36
Qc10
Qc12
Qc15
Qc17
Qc20
Qc23
Qc24
Qc29
Real power loss
SVSM
1.032
1.030
1.033
1.031
1.000
1.029
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.01
2
2
3
0
2
3
3
2
4.2502
0.2452
Table 2. Results of PSOA -voltage stability control reactive
power dispatch optimal control variables
Control Variables Variable Setting
V1
V2
V5
V8
V11
V13
T11
T12
T15
T36
Qc10
Qc12
Qc15
Qc17
Qc20
Qc23
Qc24
Qc29
Real power loss
SVSM
1.040
1.039
1.040
1.029
1.000
1.030
0.090
0.090
0.090
0.090
3
3
2
3
0
2
2
3
4.9860
0.2466
Table 3. Voltage stability under contingency state
Sl.No Contingency ORPD Setting VSCRPD Setting
1 28-27 0.1409 0.1424
2 4-12 0.1649 0.1652
3 1-3 0.1769 0.1779
4 2-4 0.2029 0.2041

 ISSN: 2252-8814
108
Table 4. Limit violation checking of state variables
State variables
limits
ORPD VSCRPD
Lower upper
Q1 -20 152 1.3422 -1.3269
Q2 -20 61 8.9900 9.8232
Q5 -15 49.92 25.920 26.001
Q8 -10 63.52 38.8200 40.802
Q11 -15 42 2.9300 5.002
Q13 -15 48 8.1025 6.033
V3 0.95 1.05 1.0372 1.0392
V4 0.95 1.05 1.0307 1.0328
V6 0.95 1.05 1.0282 1.0298
V7 0.95 1.05 1.0101 1.0152
V9 0.95 1.05 1.0462 1.0412
V10 0.95 1.05 1.0482 1.0498
V12 0.95 1.05 1.0400 1.0466
V14 0.95 1.05 1.0474 1.0443
V15 0.95 1.05 1.0457 1.0413
V16 0.95 1.05 1.0426 1.0405
V17 0.95 1.05 1.0382 1.0396
V18 0.95 1.05 1.0392 1.0400
V19 0.95 1.05 1.0381 1.0394
V20 0.95 1.05 1.0112 1.0194
V21 0.95 1.05 1.0435 1.0243
V22 0.95 1.05 1.0448 1.0396
V23 0.95 1.05 1.0472 1.0372
V24 0.95 1.05 1.0484 1.0372
V25 0.95 1.05 1.0142 1.0192
V26 0.95 1.05 1.0494 1.0422
V27 0.95 1.05 1.0472 1.0452
V28 0.95 1.05 1.0243 1.0283
V29 0.95 1.05 1.0439 1.0419
V30 0.95 1.05 1.0418 1.0397
Table 5. Comparison of real power loss
Method Minimum loss (MW)
Evolutionary programming [21] 5.0159
Genetic algorithm [22] 4.665
Real coded GA with Lindex as SVSM [23] 4.568
Real coded genetic algorithm [24] 4.5015
Proposed PSOA method 4.2502
6. CONCLUSION
In this paper, Passerine bird Swarm Optimization (PSOA) algorithm has been successfully
implemented to solve optimal reactive power dispatch problem. By using the Passerine bird communications
and behaviour, five basic rules have been created in the PSOA approach to solve the optimal reactive power
dispatch problem. Key aspect is to reduce the real power loss and also to keep the variables within the limits.
Proposed Passerine Swarm Optimization Algorithm (PSOA) has been tested in standard IEEE 30 bus test
system and simulations results reveal about the better performance of the proposed algorithm in reducing
the real power loss and enhancing the static voltage stability margin.
REFERENCES
[1] O.Alsac,and B. Scott, “Optimal load flow with steady state security,”IEEE Transaction. PAS, pp. 745-751, 1973.
[2] Lee K. Y., Paru Y. M., Oritz J. L., “A united approach to optimal real and reactive power dispatch,” IEEE
Transactions on power Apparatus and systems, PAS-104, pp. 1147-1153, 1985.
[3] A. Monticelli , M .V. F Pereira , S. Granville., “Security constrained optimal power flow with post contingency
corrective rescheduling,” IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, PWRS-2, no. 1, pp. 175-182, 1987.
[4] Deeb N , Shahidehpur S. M., “Linear reactive power optimization in a large power network using the decomposition
approach,” IEEE Transactions on power system, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 428-435, 1990.
[5] E. Hobson., “Network consrained reactive power control using linear programming,” IEEE Transactions on power
systems, PAS-99, no. 4, pp. 868-877, 1980.
[6] K. Y Lee ,Y. M Park , and J. L Oritz, “Fuel-cost optimization for both real and reactive power dispatches,” IEE
Proc, vol. 131C, no. 3, pp. 85-93, 1984.

109
[7] M.K. Mangoli, and K.Y. Lee, “Optimal real and reactive power control using linear programming,” Electr.Power
Syst.Res, vol. 26, pp. 1-10, 1993.
[8] Aparajita Mukherjee, Vivekananda Mukherjee, “Solution of optimal reactive power dispatch by chaotic krill herd
algorithm,” IET Gener. Transm. Distrib, vol. 9, no. 15, pp. 2351-2362, 2015.
[9] Hu, Z., Wang, X. & Taylor, G, “Stochastic optimal reactive power dispatch: Formulation and solution method,”
Electr. Power Energy Syst, vol. 32, pp. 615-621. 2010.
[10] Mahaletchumi A/P Morgan, Nor Rul Hasma Abdullah, Mohd Herwan Sulaiman, Mahfuzah Mustafa and Rosdiyana
Samad, “Computational intelligence technique for static VAR compensator (SVC) installation considering multi-
contingencies (N-m),” ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, vol. 10, no. 22, Dec 2015.
[11] Mohd Herwan Sulaiman, Zuriani Mustaffa, Hamdan Daniyal, Mohd Rusllim Mohamed and Omar Aliman, “Solving
Optimal Reactive Power Planning Problem Utilizing Nature Inspired Computing Techniques,” ARPN Journal of
Engineering and Applied Sciences, vol. 10, no. 21, pp. 9779-9785, Nov 2015.
[12] Mohd Herwan Sulaiman, Wong Lo Ing, Zuriani Mustaffa and Mohd Rusllim Mohamed, “Grey Wolf Optimizer for
Solving Economic Dispatch Problem with Valve-Loading Effects,” ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied
Sciences, vol. 10, no. 21, pp. 9796-9801, Nov 2015.
[13] Pandiarajan, K. & Babulal, C. K., “Fuzzy harmony search algorithm based optimal power flow for power system
security enhancement,” International Journal Electric Power Energy Syst, vol. 78, pp. 72-79. 2016.
[14] Mustaffa, Z., Sulaiman, M. H., Yusof, Y., Kamarulzaman, S. F., “A novel hybrid metaheuristic algorithm for short
term load forecasting,” International Journal of Simulation: Systems, Science and Technology, vol. 17, no. 41,
pp. 6.1-6.6. 2017.
[15] Anderson, T. R., “Biology of the ubiquitous house sparrow: From genes to populations,” Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2006.
[16] Barnard, C. J., &Sibly, R. M., “Producers and scroungers: A general model and its application to captive flocks of
house sparrows,” Animal Behavior, vol. 29, pp. 543-550, 2018.
[17] Beauchamp, G. “The effect of group size on mean food intake rate in birds,” Biological Reviews, vol. 73,
pp. 449-472, 1998.
[18] Beauchamp, G., “Group-size effects on vigilance: A search for mechanisms,” Behavioral Processes, vol. 63,
pp. 111-121, 2003.
[19] Bednekoff, B. A., & Lima, S. L., “Randomness, chaos and confusion in the study of antipredator vigilance,” Trends
in Ecology and Evolution, vol. 13, pp. 284-287, 1998.
[20] Coolen, I., Giraldeau, L. A., & Lavoie, M., “Head position as an indicator of producer and scrounger tactics in a
ground-feeding bird,” Animal Behavior, vol. 61, pp. 895-903, 2001. doi:10.1006/anbe.2000.1678.
[21] Wu Q H, Ma J T. “Power system optimal reactive power dispatch using evolutionary programming”, IEEE
Transactions on power systems, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 1243-1248, 1995.
[22] S. Durairaj, D. Devaraj, P.S. Kannan, “Genetic algorithm applications to optimal reactive power dispatch with
voltage stability enhancement,” IE(I) Journal-EL, vol. 87, Sept 2006.
[23] D.Devaraj, “Improved genetic algorithm for multi-objective reactive power dispatch problem,” European
Transactions on electrical power, vol. 17, pp. 569-581, 2007.
[24] P. Aruna Jeyanthy and Dr. D. Devaraj., “Optimal Reactive Power Dispatch for Voltage Stability Enhancement
Using Real Coded Genetic Algorithm,” International Journal of Computer and Electrical Engineering, vol. 2, no. 4,
pp. 1793-8163, Aug 2010.

Passerine swarm optimization algorithm for solving optimal reactive power dispatch problem

More Related Content

What's hot (17)

Similar to Passerine swarm optimization algorithm for solving optimal reactive power dispatch problem (20)

More from IJAAS Team (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Passerine swarm optimization algorithm for solving optimal reactive power dispatch problem