An Efficient Adaptive Moth Flame Optimization Algorithm for Solving Large-Scale Optimal Power Flow Problem with POZ, Multifuel and Valve-Point Loading Effect

  • Hitarth BuchEmail author
  • Indrajit N. Trivedi
Research Paper


This paper offers an enhanced adaptive moth flame optimization (AMFO) algorithm to solve the optimal power flow (OPF) problems efficiently. The idea of moth flame optimization (MFO) is motivated by the movement of moth headed about the moon direction. AMFO is primarily centered on the notion of MFO with adjusting the direction of moths in an adaptive manner around the flame. AMFO is compared with standard MFO for 14 different benchmark test suites. Standard IEEE 118-bus test system is used to substantiate the effectiveness and robustness of AMFO algorithm. The authentication of the suggested algorithm is established on 12 case studies for various single-objective functions like fuel cost minimization, emission minimization, active power loss minimization, voltage stability enhancement and voltage profile improvement. The simulation findings of the suggested algorithm are compared with those found by other well-known optimization methods. The achieved results demonstrate the ability and strength of AMFO approach to solving OPF problems. The outcomes divulge that AMFO algorithm can obtain accurate and improved OPF solutions compared with the other methods. A comparison among the convergence qualities of AMFO and the different techniques demonstrates the predominance of AMFO to achieve the optimal power flow solution with rapid convergence.


Adaptive moth flame algorithm Optimal power flow Power system optimization 



The authors would like to thank Prof. Seyedali Mirjalili and Shri. Pradeep Jangir for their valuable support.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

In compliance with the journal’s policy and our ethical obligation as researchers, no potential conflict of interest should be reported. The authors certify that they are not involved in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter discussed in this manuscript.


  1. Abido MMAM (2002a) Optimal power flow using particle swarm optimization. J Electr Power Energy Syst 24(7):563–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abido MA (2002b) Optimal power flow using tabu search algorithm. Electr Power Components Syst 30:469–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Abou El Ela AAA, Abido MAA, Spea SRR (2010) Optimal power flow using differential evolution algorithm. Electr Power Syst Res 80(7):878–885CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. AlRashidi MR, El-Hawary ME (2009) Applications of computational intelligence techniques for solving the revived optimal power flow problem. Electr Power Syst Res 79(4):694–702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bhesdadiya RH, Trivedi IN, Jangir P, Kumar A, Jangir N, Totlani R (2017) A novel hybrid approach particle swarm optimizer with moth-flame optimizer algorithm. Springer, Singapore, pp 569–577Google Scholar
  6. Bouchekara HREH (2014) Optimal power flow using black-hole-based optimization approach. Appl Soft Comput 24:879–888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bouchekara HREHEH, Abido MA, Boucherma M (2014a) Optimal power flow using Teaching-Learning-Based Optimization technique. Electr Power Syst Res 114:49–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bouchekara HREH, Abido MA, Chaib AE, Mehasni R (2014b) Optimal power flow using the league championship algorithm: a case study of the Algerian power system. Energy Convers Manag 87:58–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bouchekara HREH, Chaib AE, Abido MA, El-Sehiemy RA (2016) Optimal power flow using an Improved Colliding Bodies Optimization algorithm. Appl Soft Comput 42:119–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Buch H, Trivedi IN (2018) On the efficiency of metaheuristics for solving the optimal power flow. Neural Comput Appl 1–19Google Scholar
  11. Buch H, Trivedi IN, Jangir P (2017) Moth flame optimization to solve optimal power flow with non-parametric statistical evaluation validation. Cogent Eng 4:1. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carpentier J (1962) Contribution to the economic dispatch problem. Bull la Soc Fr des Electr 3(1):431–447Google Scholar
  13. Chaib AEAAEA, Bouchekara HREHREH, Mehasni R, Abido MAA (2016) Optimal power flow with emission and non-smooth cost functions using backtracking search optimization algorithm. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 81:64–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frank S, Steponavice I, Rebennack S (2012) Optimal power flow: a bibliographic survey II. Energy Syst 3(3):259–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Friedman M (1937) The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. J Am Stat AssocGoogle Scholar
  16. Friedman M (1940) A comparison of alternative tests of significance for the problem of m rankings. Ann Math StatGoogle Scholar
  17. Ghanizadeh GB, Mokhtari AJ, Abedi G, Gharehpetian M (2011) Optimal power flow based on imperialist competitive algorithm. Int Rev Electr Eng 6(4):1847–1852Google Scholar
  18. Group, IIT Power One-line Diagram of IEEE 118-bus Test System. [Online]. Accessed 15 Jan 2017
  19. Güçyetmez M, Çam E (2016) A new hybrid algorithm with genetic-teaching learning optimization (G-TLBO) technique for optimizing of power flow in wind-thermal power systems. Electr Eng 98(2):145–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Javidy B, Hatamlou A, Mirjalili S (2015) Ions motion algorithm for solving optimization problems. Appl Soft Comput J 32:72–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kessel P, Glavitsch H (1986) Estimating the voltage stability of a power system. IEEE Trans Power Deliv 1(3):346–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kumar NM, Wunnava A, Sahany S, Panda R (2015) A new adaptive Cuckoo search algorithm. In: 2015 IEEE 2nd int. conf. recent trends inf. syst., no. December, pp 1–5Google Scholar
  23. Lai LL, Ma JT, Yokoyama R, Zhao M (1997) Improved genetic algorithms for optimal power flow under both normal and contingent operation states. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 19(5):287–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Li Z, Zhou Y, Zhang S, Song J (2016) Lévy-flight moth-flame algorithm for function optimization and engineering design problems. Math Probl EngGoogle Scholar
  25. Mirjalili S (2015a) Moth-flame optimization algorithm: a novel nature-inspired heuristic paradigm. Knowl Based Syst 89:228–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mirjalili S (2015b) SCA: a Sine Cosine Algorithm for solving optimization problems. Knowl Based SystGoogle Scholar
  27. Mirjalili S (2015c) The ant lion optimizer. Adv Eng Softw 83:80–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mirjalili S (2016) Dragonfly algorithm: a new meta-heuristic optimization technique for solving single-objective, discrete, and multi-objective problems. Neural Comput Appl 27(4):1053–1073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mirjalili S, Mirjalili SM, Lewis A (2014) Grey wolf optimizer. Adv Eng Softw 69:46–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mirjalili S, Mirjalili SM, Hatamlou A (2016) Multi-verse optimizer: a nature-inspired algorithm for global optimization. Neural Comput Appl 27(2):495–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mohamed A-AAAA, Mohamed YS, El-Gaafary AAM, Hemeida AM (2017) Optimal power flow using moth swarm algorithm. Electr Power Syst Res 142:190–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mukherjee A, Mukherjee V (2015) Solution of optimal power flow using chaotic krill herd algorithm. Chaos Solitons FractalsGoogle Scholar
  33. Niu M, Wan C, Xu Z (2014) A review on applications of heuristic optimization algorithms for optimal power flow in modern power systems. J Mod Power Syst Clean Energy 2(4):289–297CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Ong P (2014) Adaptive cuckoo search algorithm for unconstrained optimization. Sci World J 2014:943403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pandya KS, Joshi SK (2005) A survey of Optimal Power Flow methods. J Appl Inf Technol 4(5):450–458Google Scholar
  36. Paranjothi SR, Anburaja K (2002) Optimal power flow using refined genetic algorithm. Electr Power Components Syst 30(10):1055–1063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Quade D (1979) Using weighted rankings in the analysis of complete blocks with additive block effects. J Am Stat AssocGoogle Scholar
  38. Roa-Sepulveda CAA, Pavez-Lazo BJJ (2001) A solution to the optimal power flow using simulated annealing. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 25(1):47–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Saremi S, Mirjalili S, Lewis A (2017) Grasshopper optimisation algorithm: theory and application. Adv Eng Softw 105:30–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sinsuphan N, Leeton U, Kulworawanichpong T (2013) Optimal power flow solution using improved harmony search method. Appl Soft Comput J 13(5):2364–2374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Soliman G, Khorshid M, Abou-El-Enien T (2016) Modified moth-flame optimization algorithms for terrorism prediction. Int J Appl Innov Eng Manag 5(7):47–59Google Scholar
  42. Surender Reddy S et al (2014) Faster evolutionary algorithm based optimal power flow using incremental variables. Int J Electr Power Energy SystGoogle Scholar
  43. Trivedi IN, Bhoye M, Jangir P, Parmar SA, Jangir N, Kumar A (2016a) Voltage stability enhancement and voltage deviation minimization using BAT optimization algorithm. In: 2016 3rd International conference on electrical energy systems (ICEES), pp 112–116Google Scholar
  44. Trivedi IN, Jangir P, Jangir N, Parmar SA, Bhoye M, Kumar A (2016b) Voltage stability enhancement and voltage deviation minimization using multi-verse optimizer algorithm. In: 2016 International conference on circuit, power and computing technologies (ICCPCT), pp 1–5Google Scholar
  45. Wolpert DH, Macready WG (1997) No free lunch theorems for optimization. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 1(1):67–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Yao X, Liu Y, Lin G (1999) Evolutionary programming made faster. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 3(2):82–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Shiraz University 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Gujarat Technological UniversityAhmedabadIndia
  2. 2.Department of Electrical EngineeringGovernment Engineering CollegeRajkotIndia
  3. 3.Department of Electrical EngineeringGovernment Engineering CollegeGandhinagarIndia

Personalised recommendations