2143

Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems 26 (2014) 21432154

DOI:10.3233/IFS-130889
IOS Press

Hopfield neural networks approach for design

optimization of hybrid power systems with
multiple renewable energy sources in a fuzzy
environment
T. Ganesana , P. Vasantc, and I. Elamvazuthib
a Department

of Chemical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Petronas, Perak, Malaysia

of Electrical & Electronic Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Petronas, Perak, Malaysia
c Department of Fundamental & Applied Sciences, Universiti Teknologi Petronas, Perak, Malaysia
b Department

Abstract. The global energy sector faces major challenges in providing sufficient energy to the worlds ever increasing energy
demand. Methods to produce a greener, cost effective and reliable source of alternative energy needs to be explored and exploited.
One of those methods is done by integrating (or hybridizing) multiple different alternative energy sources (e.g. wind turbine
generators, photovoltaic cell panels and fuel-fired generators, equipped with storage batteries) to form a distributed generation
(DG) power system. However, even with DG power systems, cost effectiveness, reliability and pollutant emissions are still major
issues that need to be resolved. The model development and optimization of the DG power system was carried out successfully in
the previous work using Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO). The goal was to minimize cost, maximize reliability and minimize
emissions (multi-objective) subject to the requirements of the power balance and design constraints. In this work, due to the
uncertain nature on the weather conditions, the power output from the PV cells, WTG and the storage batteries which are subject
to insolation and wind conditions were fuzzified in an effort to create a more realistic model. The optimization (in a fuzzy
environment) was then performed by using Hopfield neural network (HNN). The optimized results were then discussed and
analyzed.
Keywords: Alternative energy, fuzzy environment, Hopfield neural networks (HNN), optimization strategy, distributed generation
(DG)

Nomenclature

COST ($/yr)
w, s, b
Ii , Spi , OMpi

Corresponding

total cost
wind, solar and battery storage
initial cost, present worth of salvage
value, present worth of operation
and maintenance cost

author. P. Vasant, Department of Fundamental

& Applied Sciences, Universiti Teknologi Petronas, 31750 Perak,
Malaysia. E-mail: pvasant@gmail.com.

Np (yr)
Cg

lifespan of the project

annual cost of purchasing power
from the utility grid
w s , b ($/m2 ) initial cost of WTG, PV panels,
and storage battery
Aw , As
swept area of WTG and PV panels
salvage value of WTG and
Sw , Ss ($/m2 )
solar per square metre
, Y,
inflation rate, interest rate,
escalation rate

1064-1246/14/$27.50 2014 IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved

2144

T. Ganesan et al. / Hopeld neural networks approach for design optimization of hybrid power systems

OMw ,OMs ,
yearly operation and maintenance
OMb ($/m2 /yr) cost for wind, solar and storage
batteries
Np , Nw , Ns ,
Lifespan of project, WTG, PV
and storage batteries
Nb (yr)
s , w , b
efficiency of PV, WTG, and
storage batteries
Pg ,t (kW)
purchased power from the utility
at hour t
psi ($/kWh)
grid power price
EIR
Energy Index of Reliability
EENS (kWhr/yr) Expected Energy Not Served
E
Total power demand per annum
K
ratio of purchased power with
respect to the hourly insufficient
power
PE
pollutant emission
, , 
coefficients approximating the
generator emission characteristics
Pbcap (kW)
capacity of storage batteries
state of charge of storage
Pbsoc (kW)
battries
Pbmax (kW)
maximum conversion capacity
Pbmin (kW)
minimum permissible storage
level
Pbcapmax (kW) allowed storage capacity
Pbr (kW)
rated battery capacity
Pb (t) (kW)
discharge power from the
storage batteries
Pgmax (kW)
maximum annual power allowed
to be purchased from the utility
grid
Pgmin (kW)
minimum annual power allowed
to be bought from the utility
grid
T (hr)
period under observation,
8760 hr (per year)
Pbsup (t) (kW)
surplus power at hour t
load demand during hour t
Pd (t) (kW)
Ptotal (t) (kW)
total power from WTG, PV and
FFG
Pg (kW)
power from the FFG
Pw (kW)
power from the WTG
Ps (kW)
power from the PV
R
ratio of maximum permissible
unmet power
Pdump (kW)
dumped power
PWTG (kW)
output power from th WTG
V, Vci , Vr ,
wind speed, cut-in wind speed, rated
Vco (m/s)
wind speed, cut-off wind
speed

rated WTG power

Pr (kW)
Awmax , Awmin (m2 ) maximum and minimum swept
area of WTGs
Asmin , Asmax (m2 ) minimum and maximum swept
area of PVs
K
Cost objective function (US $)
G
Emissions objective function
(tonnes/month)

Level of satisfaction (0 to 1)
m
Number of function evaluations
, B, C,
Coefficients of the fuzzy
membership function
zi
generalized solution variables
S
generalized solution domain
1. Introduction
In recent times, the global energy sector faces two
major challenges in providing sufficient energy to the
worlds ever increasing energy demand. First, there is
a growing need to produce greener and cleaner energy
with respect to stricter environmental regulations. Secondly, with the diminishing fossil-fuel reserves, a
reliable and stable source of alternative energy needs
to be explored and exploited. In seeking out these alternative power sources, it has been identified that the
capital investment as well as the maintenance costs
considerably are high. Besides that, various reliability issues have been addressed over the years. One
of the major advances, in developing a reliable and
greener [1] power source is by integrating or hybridizing multiple different energy sources (e.g. wind turbine
generators, photovoltaic cell panels and storage batteries) to form a distributed generation (DG) power
system. These hybrid power generation systems have
been built and are now in stable operations [24]. However, even with DG power systems, cost effectiveness,
reliability [5, 6] and pollutant emissions are still major
issues that need to be tackled. Therefore, to address the
previously mentioned issues, particle swarm optimization (PSO) methods have been applied to the problem
by Wang et al. [7]. Other works on the design and sizing of hybrid power systems with solar and wind power
sources include Chedid et al. [8] and Chedid et al. [9].
The Hopfield Recurrent Artificial Neural Network
(HNN) was developed in 1982 by Hopfield [10] and
Hopfield [11]. These neural nets observed to have applications in optimization problems (for instance, see Lee,
Sode-Yome et al. [12] and Tank et al. [13]). One of the
key features of the HNN is that there is a decrease in the

T. Ganesan et al. / Hopeld neural networks approach for design optimization of hybrid power systems

energy by a finite amount whenever there is a change

in the networks state. This essential property confirms
convergence of the output whenever the network state is
changed. The HNN uses reinforced learning (Hebbian
learning) to update the weights in each recursion. In this
work, the HNN was used as an optimization algorithm.
In this work, the average power output from the PV
cell, WTG nand storage batteries were fuzzified. Since
weather conditions are often non-deterministic, fuzzifying these variants provides a more realistic approach
by capturing these uncertainties when modeling and
optimizing the DG system. The HNN algorithm was
then used as an optimization tool in this fuzzy environment.
This paper is organized as follows: Section 2
introduces the problem description and the fuzzy environment (insolation and the wind speed); Section 3
optimization methodology and the analysis and computational results are included in Section 4. The paper
ends with concluding remarks and recommendations
for future research work.

2. Problem description
2.1. Hybrid DG power system
The goal of this work is to optimize the design parameters of a hybrid DG power system with alternative
energy power sources (solar and wind power) with
respect to power balance as well as design constraints
as done previously in [7]. The problem in this work
is multi-objective, thus the design parameters would
have to be optimized such that it minimizes the cost,
maximizes the reliability and minimizes pollutant emissions of the power system. The usage of each of these
power sources influences the reliability, cost and the
environment criterions differently. The configuration
the grid-connected hybrid DG system is as in Fig. 1.
One of the cheaper fuel types that can be used for
an FFG would be coal. Coal is reliable, abundantly
available and a relatively cheap fossil fuel source. The
only major drawback with fuel sources like coal is
that they have a high rate of pollutant emission (PE).
Similar issues are currently faced by other fossil fuel
alternatives, for instance; diesel, petrol and natural gas
(NG). Also take note that other fossil fuels are not as
cheap as coal and thus cost effectiveness is an issue.
The oxidation of these fuel types produces alarming
levels of pollutant gases such as NOx , SOx , carbon
monoxide and carbon dioxide. Thus, with the increas-

2145

ingly stricter enactment of environmental regulation,

sole dependency on FFGs for power is clearly an unfeasible option. This is the main factor that motivates the
development of hybrid DG systems which reduces the
global dependency on fossil fuel.
One of the cleanest and cheapest power sources
(despite the initial cost) known is wind power since
it has no pollutant emissions and wind power is available with no purchase cost. However, the magnitude
of wind power is heavily dependent on weather conditions. Thus, the location where the wind turbine is
placed (on-shore or off-shore locations) is a critical factor. Due to varying weather conditions, the reliability of
wind power is intermittent and this makes sole dependency on wind power unfeasible. Unfortunately, solar
power also suffers similar issues with wind power. Sunlight (insolation) is the main source of energy for PV
cells. Like wind, this power source is very dependent on
weather conditions although relatively cheap (besides
the initial cost) and clean (with zero emissions). This
makes solar power an unreliable energy source due to
fluctuations in weather conditions.
Since wind and solar power are highly unreliable
energy source, including storage batteries into the DG
system is highly desirable. The energy storage mechanism can thus filter-out the fluctuations and give a
consistent amount of power supply with respect to time
[14]. The storage batteries then can be considered to
behave like a regulator that balances the supply and
demand variability.
Each power source caters differently for reliability,
cost effectiveness and pollutant emissions. Therefore,
the development of the hybrid DG system seems to be
an attractive option in catering for all three criterions
simultaneously.
This is a nonlinear problem that involves 9 constraints
and 67 decision variables. The problem statement is
formulated as follows:
Min COST ($/yr)
Min Pollutant Emissions (PE) (ton/yr)
Max Energy Index of Reliability (EIR)
subject to power balance and design constraints

(1)

For the definitions of the variables, please refer to the

nomenclature above. The objective functions (refer to
[3, 4, 8] and [9]), for the overall cost, COST ($/yr) is as
the following:

2146

T. Ganesan et al. / Hopeld neural networks approach for design optimization of hybrid power systems

Fig. 1. Schematic of the grid-connected hybrid DG system.

COST =

S + OMPi )
+ Cg
Np

i=w, s, b (Ii

(2)

The annual cost of purchasing power from the grid is

calculated as the following:

For the WTG

Iw = w Aw
SPw = Sw Aw (

OMPw = OMw

Cg =

(3)

1 + Np
)
1+

Np

1+ i
Aw
)
(
1+

(4)

T


Pg, t

(11)

t=1

The objective functions for the reliability (refer to [3],

[4], [8] and [9]), is as the following:
EIR = 1

(5)

EENS
E

(12)

i=1

For the PV

EENS =
Is = s As
SPs = Ss As (

OMPs = OMs

(6)

1 + Np
)
1+

Np

1+ i
As
(
)
1+

(7)

(Pbmin Pbsoc (t) Psup (t)) U(t)

t=1

(13)
Ptotal (t) = Pw (t) + Ps (t) + Pg (t)
Pg (t) = (Pd (t) Pw (t) Ps (t) Pb (t))

(14)

(15)

(8)
The objective function for the pollutant emissions
which was quadratically approximated (see [15] and
[16]) is as the following:

i=1

For the Storage Batteries

Xb

1 + (i1)/Nb
Ib = b Pbcap
(
)
1+

T


(9)

i=1

PE =  +

T


(Pg, t (t))

t=1

OMPb = OMb

Np

1+ i
)
Pbcap
(
1+
i=1


(10)

+

T

t=1

2
(Pg, t (t))

(16)

T. Ganesan et al. / Hopeld neural networks approach for design optimization of hybrid power systems
Table 1
Input parameters for the hybrid Dg system

The power balance constraints is as the following:

Pb (t) + Pw (t) + Ps (t) + Pg (t) Pdump (t) Pd (t)

(18)
The WTG output power is calculated as follows:

0
iff V < Vci

a V 3 b Pr iff Vci V < Vr

PWTG =
iff Vr V Vco
Pr

0
iff V > Vco
(19)
where,
a = Pr /(Vr3 Vci3 )

(20)

a = Vci3 /(Vr3 Vci3 )

(21)

Pw = PWTG Aw w

(22)

The PV output power is calculated as follows:

(23)

System Parameters

Values

s , w , b
, Y,
Np , Nw , Ns , Nb (yr)
w s , b ($/m2 )
Sw , Ss ($/m2 )
OMw ,OMs , OMb ($/m2 /yr)
Vci , Vr , Vco (m/s)
Pr (kW)
Awmax , Awmin (m2 )
Asmin , Asmax (m2 )
Pbmax (kW)
Pbmin (kW)
Pbr (kW)
Pbcapmax (kW)
psi ($/kWh)

50%, 16%, 82%

9%, 12%, 12%
20, 20, 22, 10
100, 450, 100
10, 45
2.5, 4.3, 10
2.5, 12.5, 20
4
10000, 400
30, 8000
3
3
8
40
0.12

Insilation (kW/m2)

Pb (t) + Pw (t) + Ps (t) + Pg (t) (1 R)Pd (t) (17)

Ps = H As s

2147

The design balance constraints is as the following:

Aw min Aw Aw max

(24)
hours of a day (hr)

As min As As max

(25)

Pb min Pbsoc Pbcap

(26)

2.2. Power output from WTG, PV and storage

batteries in the fuzzy environment

0 Pbcap Pbcap max

(27)

Pb Pb max

(28)

Difficulties in the modeling efforts that involve the

weather are common. This is due to the uncertain nature
of the weather conditions (spatially and/or temporally
dependent). Therefore, this sort of uncertainty needs
to be taken into account when performing modeling
or optimization with variables which are dependent on
the weather. In this work, the average annual insolation
and the wind speed are projected from the hourly profile in a day. These two variables are heavily dependent
on the weather conditions since they produce power to
charge the storage batteries which in return supplies
power to the grid. Therefore, power grid is subjected
to these three power outputs (PV, WTG and storage
batteries). There for these power outputs are fuzzified
using the S-curve membership function from their average, maximum and minimum values obtained from [7].
Therefore equation (15) is modified as follows:

Pg min

T


Pg, t Pg max

(29)

t=1

01

(30)

The input parameters considered in this work is as in

Table 1:
The data used (obtained from [7]) for the hourly
input of the insolation, wind speed patterns and the
hourly load demand in this simulation program are as
in Fig. 24 respectively.

Fig. 2. Hourly insolation profile.

2148

T. Ganesan et al. / Hopeld neural networks approach for design optimization of hybrid power systems

Fig. 5. DG Fuzzy Modeling Strategy.

Fig. 3. Hourly wind speed profile.

Fuzzy constraints:
n


aij xj b , i = 1, 2, . . . , m
i

power demand (kW)

j=1

(33)

Using Zadehs extension principle the left side of ith

n


fuzzy constraint in (2),
a ij xj is aggregated as fuzzy
j=1

set. And let us assume a credibility level , (0 < <

B
1+C ) chosen by the Decision Maker (DM), as he takes
a risk and ignores all the membership degree smaller
than levels [17, 18].

All fuzzy data b S (bia , bib ) is fuzzy variables

i

hours of a day (hr)

with the following logistic membership functions [19],

where for the PV power output the 3402.63 S

(17.4763, 6787.78) and for the WTG power output

Fig. 4. Hourly power demand profile.

Pg (t) = (Pd (t) Kw Pw (t) Ks Ps (t) Kb Pb (t))

(31)
Pg (t) = (Pd (t) P w (t) P s (t) P b (t))

(32)

The power supplied to the grid is thus fuzzified to be

evaluated in a fuzzy environment as shown in Fig. 5:
Since these power outputs are fuzzified, by implication the constraints in the DG problem become fuzzy.
The optimization problem description of the DG system is then redefined in the fuzzy environment with the
elaborated structure as follows:
Minimize <IF01> (objective functions) subject to

=
b
i

0.3525 S (0.1198, 0.5853) from [7]. The fuzzy coefficients B = 0.08, C = 0.1 and the (0, 1). The following
points are to be cleared when we employ system depicting in Equation (31) [20]:
(i) Specification of fuzzy inequality relations and
methodology to obtain its crisp equivalents.
(i) The interpretation minimization in logistic type
objective functions.
After the wind speed and the insolation have been fuzzified, the problem statement then is transformed from the
crisp into a fuzzy nonlinear programming environment.
3. Methodology

if bi bia
B

1+Ce

bi ba
i
bb ba
i
i

if bia bi bib
if bi bib

In this work, the multi-objective problem was tackled

by considering the cost as the objective function while
the emission as well as the EIR was treated as constraints. The structure of the problem is to minimize
cost in USD/yr subject to fuzzy constraints.

T. Ganesan et al. / Hopeld neural networks approach for design optimization of hybrid power systems

2149

Fig. 6. Hopfield Recurrent Neural Network.

3.1. Hopeld neural network

The HNN consists of different components which
are the inputs, outputs and weights (see Fig. 6). The
other two crucial subcomponents of the HNN are the
Hebbian learning mechanism and the energy function.
The integration of all these features in the HNN makes
it a good optimization tool.
The outputs of the double-layer HNN are computed
by the composition of the inputs and the associated
weights such as the following:

 
1

yi =
(34)
wij xj w2ij
ij

The energy function is computed for each of the

iterations:

k(w1ij w2ij xj yiT )
(37)
Eij =
ij

where k is a scalar constant.

Since the energy of the network reduces finitely as the
network states change, hence as the number of iterations
increases to its maxima, the differential of the energy
between states approximates to 0:
As n max, E 0




E = Eijm+1 Eijm 

(38)

ij

where xj is the input column matrix, hi is the output

column matrix and wij 1 and wij 2 are the weights of
the first layer and the second layer respectively. Since
this is a recurrent network, hence the outputs are fed
back as the inputs:
 m+1  m
xjT
(35)
= yiT
where n is the number of iterations.
Due to its recursive nature, the inputs and outputs
change with respect to the number of iterations. Thus,
the modified Hebbian learning (a form of reinforced
learning) is used to alter the weights based on the network outputs and the inputs:


wij = xjT yi
(36)
where is the learning rate coefficient.

where m is the number of iterations.

At this point a convergence criterion is set, whereby
if the differential energy Eis lesser than some value
then the program is halted and solution (outputs of the
network, hi ) is printed out. Otherwise, the iterations
continue until this criterion is satisfied. The working
algorithm of the HNN is as the following:
Step 1: Set xi as the inputs
Step 2: Initialize neural network weights, wij 1 and
wij 2
Step 3: Compute neural network output, yj
Step 4: Compute an energy state of the neural network,
Eij
Step 5: If the energy difference, dEij is greater than 1,
go to step 2 and Update neural network output,
yj = y j
Update the weights by Hebbian learning,
wij = w ij

2150

T. Ganesan et al. / Hopeld neural networks approach for design optimization of hybrid power systems
Table 2
Value of objective functions

Objective functions
EIR
PE
COST

Value
0.960335
6.95449
5030.42

Table 3
Comparison of the optimized design parameters for each method
Optimized design parameters
area s
area w
Pb cap
kappa

Value
20.5193
428.833
18.6506
0.0621195

Step 6: If energy difference less than 0.05, proceed to

step 7, else go to step 2.
Step 7: Initialize power system coefficients and compute design parameters
Step 8: If any constraints are not satisfied, go to step
2, otherwise proceed to step 9.
Step 9: Compute fitness values of the design parameters. If fitness criterion satisfied then halt
program and print solutions, otherwise, go to
step 2.
The stopping criterion used in this work is identical to
the fitness criterion. If the fitness criterion is not met,
than the program proceeds iteratively, otherwise it halts
and prints the solutions.
The fitness criterion of the HNN is met if the network output converges to some constant value (which
means that no further optimization occurs in the objective function), no constraints are broken and all the
decision variables are non-negative. If these conditions
are met, then it is considered that the solutions are at its
fittest and thus the program comes to a halt.
4. Results and discussion
The algorithms used in this work were programmed
using the C++ programming language on a personal
computer with an Intel dual core processor running at 2
GHz. The objective functions, cost ($/yr), EIR, and the
pollutant emissions (PE) (ton/yr) was optimized using
the HNN approach in a fuzzy environment.
The value of the objective functions at 1 =
0.725082, 2 [0.0505, 0.7251] and 3 = 0.725082
are as in Table 2 and the corresponding optimized
design parameters are provided in Table 3:

The illustration of overall distribution of the cost

(USD) function with respect to 1 , 2 and 3 is given
in Fig. 7: The illustration of overall distribution of
the EIR and PE functions with respect to 1 , 2 and
3 is given in Fig. 8 and 9 respectively. It can be
observed from Fig 7 that the maximum value of the
cost function is 5030.48 at 1 [0.0505, 0.7251], 2 =
0.7251 and 3 = 0.05051 with the minimum value of
5030.42 at 1 [0.0505, 0.7251], 2 = 0.7251 and
3 = 0.7251. The distribution of the Energy Index
of Reliability (EIR) with respect to 1 , 2 and 3
is shown graphically in Fig. 8: It can be observed
from Fig. 8 that the maximum value of the EIR is
0.960335 at 1 [0.0505, 0.7251] and 2 = 0.7576
and 3 [0.0505, 0.7251] with the minimum value of
0.953951 at 1 [0.0505, 0.7251] and 2 = 0.0505
and 3 [0.0505, 0.7251]. The distribution of the Pollutant Emissions (PE) in tonnes/yr with respect to 1 ,
2 and 3 is shown graphically in Fig. 9:
It can be observed from Fig. 9 that the maximum
value of the PE is 10.9629 at 1 [0.0505, 0.7251],
2 = 0.7576 and 3 = 0.0505 with the minimum value
of 6.95449 at 1 [0.0505, 0.7251], 2 = 0.7251 and
3 = 0.7251. The progression of the objective function, cost ($/yr) with respect to the number of function
evaluations is shown in Fig. 10.
In Fig. 10, the maximum value of the cost function is
28718234 at the 1st function evaluation with the minimum at 5030.42 at the 28th function evaluation. It can
be observed in Fig 10 that cost function gradually converges to a single value in a decaying fashion as the
number of function evaluations increase. This shows
that the HNN algorithm is very stable when used in this
problem. The trend of the differential energy state of
the neural net with respect to the number of function
evaluations is shown in Fig. 11 and Table 4 shows the
list of parameters initialized prior to the execution of
the HNN algorithm:
It is shown in Fig. 11 that the maximum value of the
differential energy state of the HNN is 1556.76 and the
minimum is at 0.0597. At the 30th function evaluation
the differential energy state of the HNN converges and
so does the output.
An increase in the complexity of the algorithm to
include more optimization methods (hybrids) as well
as constraint handling features may improve the HNN
approach and hence provide a solution closer to the
global optimal. Since the execution of these sorts of
codes (algorithmically complex) would be computationally costly, thus a more powerful computer would be
required. Another method to improve the HNN method

T. Ganesan et al. / Hopeld neural networks approach for design optimization of hybrid power systems

alpha3 = 0.532

alpha3 = 0.505

5030.49

5030.42

5030.48
5030.47

5030.41
5030.40

COST (USD)

COST (USD)

2151

5030.46
5030.45
5030.44

5030.39
5030.38
5030.37
5030.36
5030.35
0.8

5030.43
5030.42
0.8

0.6

0.8

0.6

alp 0.4
ha
2

0.6
0.2
0

0.2

0.6

0.4

alp

0.4

ha

alpha 1

0.2
0

0.2

0.8

0.4

a1

alph

alpha3 = 0.7251
alpha3 = 0.3603

5030.45

5030.41
5030.40

COST (USD)

COST (USD)

5030.42

5030.39
5030.38
5030.37
5030.36
5030.35
0.8
0.8

0.6
0.4

alp

ha

0.4

0.2
0

0.2
0

0.6

alpha 1

5030.44
5030.43
5030.42
5030.41
5030.40
5030.39
5030.38
0.8
0.6
0.6

0.4

alpha

0.8

0.4

0.2
0 0

0.2

alpha 1

Fig. 7. Overall distribution of the Cost Function with respect to 1 , 2 and 3 .

utilized in this work would be to further hybridize it with

other methods like particle swarm optimization (PSO)
[21], genetic programming (GP) [22] or other classes
of evolutionary algorithms. Hybridizing these methods
with algorithms like Tabu search or Direct Search may
provide it with a more efficient system for handling scenarios with multiple constraints and thus pave the way
for a solution closer to the global optimum.
The HNN method can be considered robust and applicable for a wide range of optimization problems. With
modifications to the energy function of the HNN and
some of the numerical parameters (see Table 4), the
HNN method could be customized for solving nonlinear (or non-convex) type problems. This robustness
can mainly be attributed to the convergence capabilities
and the recursive nature of the HNN network to handle
multivariate and nonlinearities in a particular problem.
The level of nonlinearity is considerably low where the
only nonlinear scenario in the problem is the quadratic
approximate of the emissions (PE) based on the load.
The recursive nature of the HNN gives it the capacity
to handle this issue where the degrees of nonlinearities
are tolerable.
With the computer specifications given in section
4, the HNN method takes about 0.367 seconds of
computational time to reach the optimal solution. The

computational time is closely related to the algorithmic

complexity. Hence, the variation of this factor in the
methods proposed in this work heavily influences the
computational time.
Due to the network energy component in the HNN
algorithm, the stability and the convergence of the computations are assured in both these methods (see Figs. 10
and 11). A global solution with a better computational
time (or minimal function evaluations) may be obtained
by implementing the HNN method on a high performance computer.
It was also inferred that the HNN method was easily implemented using the language of C++. The HNN
method performed very well in terms of feasibility. This
can be concluded since this method did not break any
of the given constraints in this problem.
Artificial neural networks have been used extensively
in solving issues in power systems operations and as
control strategies [23], [25]. Artificial neural networks
[26], [27] and Hopfield neural networks (HNN) [28],
[29] have been specifically used for solving the economic dispatch problem. DG with multiple renewable
energy sources is also a power system related problem
and thus has many similarities with the economic dispatch problem in terms of its multivariate nature and
degree on non-linearities. Thus, the similarity between

2152

T. Ganesan et al. / Hopeld neural networks approach for design optimization of hybrid power systems

alpha3 = 0.0505

alpha3 = 0.3606
0.962

0.960

0.960

0.958

0.958

EIR

EIR

0.962

0.956

0.956

0.954

0.954

0.952
0.8

0.952
0.8
0.8

0.6

alph

a2

0.962

0.2
0

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.2

0.8

0.6

0.6

0.4

alph

0.2

a2

alpha 1

0.4
0.2
0

alpha 1

alpha3 = 0.5231
alpha3 = 0.7251
0.962

0.960

0.960

EIR

0.958

EIR

0.958

0.956
0.954

0.956
0.954

0.952
0.8
0.8

0.6
0.6

0.4

alph

a2

0.952
0.8

0.2
0

0.2
0

0.8

0.6
0.4

0.4

alph

alpha 1

a2

0.2

0.2
0

0.4

0.6

alpha 1

Fig. 8. Overall distribution of EIR Function with respect to 1 , 2 and 3 .

the DG problem and the economic dispatch problem

may be the reason why the HNN algorithm performs
very well in this work.

Table 4
List of parameters initialized for the HNN algorithm
Parameters
Initial network inputs (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 )

5. Recommendations and conclusions

In this work, the HNN algorithm was used to
optimize the design of the hybrid DG system in a
fuzzy environment (fuzzy wind speed and insolation).
The incorporation of the fuzzy environment into this
problem provides more realistic results due to the nondeterministic nature of the weather conditions. The
overall optimization of the objective function was carried very well by this method.
The double-layer HNN algorithm performed well for
this fuzzy problem. The HNN method may be applicable for a wide range of nonlinear-class optimization
problems provided that the degrees of nonlinearities are
not too high. In the event of highly nonlinear scenarios,
then algorithms like PSO [21], GP [22] or its hybrids
would do well in the optimization. However, like most
algorithms, the HNN algorithm is also very dependent
on the nature of the problem [30].

Initial weight 1 (w1 ) for the network

Initial weight 2 (w2 ) for the network
Number of neurons
Rate of learning coefficient
k, scalar constant in the energy function

Values
(3.8147, 0.1534,
4.1687, 0.5035)
0.0018
0.002
4
0.1
1

In this work, the triple objective optimization was

tackled using the HNN algorithm by considering the
cost function as the objective function and the EIR
as well as the PE functions as the constraints. For a
rigorous study using this methodology, future works
should analyze optimal designs by swapping the EIR
and the PE with the cost function (objective function)
alternately. A more robust and effective method which
avoids this sort of rigor, would be to use techniques
such as the Non-Dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm
II (NSGA-II) [31] for this problem.
In terms of constraint satisfaction, the HNN method
performs well. To improve the constraint satisfaction

T. Ganesan et al. / Hopeld neural networks approach for design optimization of hybrid power systems

alpha3 = 0.3606

8.5

10

Emissions

Emissions

alpha3 = 0.0505

11

2153

7.5
7
6.5

9
8
7
6
0.8

0.8
0.8

0.6

alph
a2

0.2
0

0.6

0.4

0.4

0.2

0.8

0.6

0.6

0.4

alph
a2

alpha 1

0.4

0.2

alpha 1

0.2
0

alpha3 = 0.7251

alpha3 = 0.5231

7.4

6.6
6.4
0.8

6.8
6.6

0.8

6.4

0.6

6.2
0.8

0.6
0.6

0.4

alp
ha

0.4

0.2

0.2
0

alpha 1

0.8

0.4
0.7

0.6

0.5

0.2
0.4

alpha
2

0.3

0.2

0.1

6.8

alp
ha

Emissions

Emissions

7.2

Fig. 9. Overall distribution of the PE with respect to 1 , 2 and 3 .

Fig. 10. The progression of the objective function, cost ($/yr) with
respect to the number of function evaluations.

while optimizing the objective functions further

approaching the global optimal, other optimization
techniques such as; genetic programming, genetic

Fig. 11. The value of the differential energy state of the HNN with
respect to the number of function evaluations.

algorithms and simulating annealing [32] should be

implemented and tested in their stand alone form or as
hybrids.

2154

T. Ganesan et al. / Hopeld neural networks approach for design optimization of hybrid power systems

Acknowledgements
This work was supported by STIRF grant (STIRF
CODE NO: 90/10.11) of University Technology
Petronas, Malaysia. The authors sincerely thank the referees for their valuable and fruitful suggestions for
the overall improvement on the novelty, quality and
originality of this research paper.

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

References
[19]
[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]
[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

M.A. EI-Sayes, M.G. Osman and S.S. Kaddah, Assessment of

the economic penetration levels of photovoltaic panels, wind
turbine generators and storage batteries, Electric Power Systems Research 27 (1993), 233246.
M.S. Kandil, S.A. Farghal and A.E. EL-Alfy, Optimum operation of an autonomous energy system suitable for new
communities in developing countries, Electric Power Systems
Research 21 (1991), 137146.
W. Kellogg, M.H. Nehrir, G. Venkataramanan and V. Gerez,
Optimal unit sizing for a hybrid wind/photovoltaic generating
system, Electric Power Systems Research 39 (1996), 3538.
W. Kellogg, M.H. Nehrir, G. Venkataramanan and V. Gerez,
Generation unit sizing and cost analysis for stand-alone wind,
photovoltaic, and hybrid wind/PV systems, IEEE Transactions
on Energy Conversion 13(1) (1998), 7075.
H. Lund, Large-scale integration of wind power into different
energy systems, Energy 30 (2005), 24022412.
G. Notton, C. Cristofari, P. Poggi and M. Muselli, Wind hybrid
electrical supply system: Behaviour simulation and sizing optimization, Wind Energy 4 (2001), 4359.
L. Wang and C. Singh, PSO-based multi-criteria optimum
design of a grid-connected hybrid power system with multiple
renewable sources of energy, Proceedings of the IEEE Swarm
Intelligence Symposium (2007).
R. Chedid, H. Akiki and S. Rahman, A decision support technique for the design of hybrid solar-wind power systems, IEEE
Transactions on Energy Conversion 13(1) (1998), 7683.
R. Chedid and S. Rahman, Unit sizing and control of hybrid
wind-solar power systems, IEEE Transactions on Energy Conversion 12(1) (1997), 7985.
J.J. Hopfield, Neural Networks and Physical Systems with
Emergent Collective Computational Abilities, Proceedings
of National Academy of Sciences Vol. 29, USA, 1982,
pp. 25542558.
J.J. Hopfield, Neurons with Graded Response have Collective Computational Properties like those of Two-State Neurons
Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences Vol. 81, USA,
1984, pp. 30883092.
K.Y. Lee, A. Sode-Yome and J.H. Park, Adaptive Hopfield
Neural Networks for Economic Load Dispatch, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 13(2), USA, 1998, pp. 519
526.
D.W. Tank, and J.J. Hopfield, Simple Neural Optimization
Network: An A/D Converter, Signal Decision Circuit and a
Linear Programming Circuit, IEEE Trans Circuits and Systems, CAS-33, 1986, pp. 533541.
J.P. Barton and D.G. Infield, Energy storage and its use with
intermittent renewable energy, IEEE Transactions on Energy
Conversion 19(2) (2004), 441448.

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

J.H. Talaq, F. El-Hawary and M.E. El-Hawary, A summary

of environmental/economic dispatch Algorithms, IEEE Trans
Power Syst 9 (1994), 15081516.
L. Bayon, J.M. Grau, M.M. Ruiz and P.M. Suarez, Optimization of SO2 and NOx emissions in thermal Plants, Journal of
Mathematical Chemistry 40(1) (2006), 2941.
H. Rommelfanger, Interactive decision making in fuzzy linear optimization problems, European Journal of Operational
Research 41(2) (1989), 210217.
H. Rommelfanger, Inequality relation in fuzzy constraints and
its use in linear fuzzy optimization, in: The Interface Between
Articial Intelligence and OR in Fuzzy Environment, Eds., J.L.
Verdegay & M. Delgado, (Verlag TUV Reinland, Koln, 1989,
195211.
P. Vasant, A. Bhattacharya, B. Sarkar and S.K. Mukherjee,
Detection of level of satisfaction and fuzziness patterns for
MCDM model with modified flexiable S-curve MF, Applied
Soft Computing 7 (2007), 10441054.
S. Atanu, P. Vasant and J.A. Cvetko, Fuzzy Optimization
with Robust Logistic Membership Function: A Case Study
In For Home Textile Industry, Proceedings of the 17th World
Congress, The International Federation of Automatic Control,
Seoul, Korea, 2008, pp. 52625266.
J. Kennedy and R. Eberhart, Particle swarm optimization, IEEE
Proceedings of the International Conference on Neural Networks, Perth, Australia, 1995, pp. 19421948.
J.R. Koza, Genetic Programming: On the Programming of
Computers by means of Natural Selection, MIT Press, USA,
1992.
J. Moreno and A. Esquivel, Neural network based approach
for the computation of harmonic power in real time
microprocessor-based vector for an induction motor drive,
IEEE Trans on Industry Application (2000), 277282.
J.R. Vazquez and P.R. Salmeron, Three phase active power
filter control using neural networks, 10th Mediterranean Electrotechnical Conference 3 (2000), 924927.
A.G. Bahbah and A.A. Girgis, New method for generators
angles and angular velocities prediction for transient stability
assessment of multi machine power systems using recurrent
neural network, IEEE Trans of Power System 19 (2004),
10151022.
G. Singh, S.C. Srivastava, P.K. Kalra and D.M. Vinod Kumar,
Fast approach to artificial neural network training and its
application to economic load dispatch, Electric Machines and
Power Systems 23 (1995), pp. 1324.
J. Kumar and G.B. Sheble, Clamped state solution of artificial
neural network for real-time economic dispatch, IEEE Trans
on Power Systems 10(2) (1995), 925931.
T.D. King, M.E. El-Hawary and F. El-Hawary, Optimal
environmental dispatching of electric power systems via an
improved hopfield neural network model, IEEE Trans on
Power Systems 10(3) (1995), 15591565.
S. Abe, J. Kawakami and K. Hirasawa, Solving inequality constrained combinatorial optimization problems by the hopfield
neural networks, Neural Networks 5 (1992), 663670.
D.H. Wolpert and W.G. Macready, No free lunch theorems for
optimization, IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 1 (1997), 67.
K. Deb, A. Pratap, S. Agarwal and Meyarivan, A fast and elitist
multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II, IEEE Transactions On Evolutionary Computation 6(2) (2002), 182-197.
P. Vasant, Hybrid simulated annealing and genetic algorithms
for industrial production management problems, International
Journal of Computational Methods 7(2) (2010), 279-297.