ArticleScientific reports2025
Enhancing stochastic optimal power flow with modified cheetah optimizer for integrating renewable energy sources.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Dynamic multi-period optimal power flow considering renewable energy degradation and temperature derating.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this paper, a modified cheetah optimizer (MCO) algorithm is presented, which has been designed to address the optimal power flow (OPF) problem in power grids that utilize renewable energy sources (RES). The issue of uncertainty in cost models for wind turbines (WTs) and photovoltaics (PVs), which can result in overestimation or underestimation of RES, is addressed by including the uncertain cost value in the direct cost of these renewable units to calculate their cost value accurately. The MCO methodology was applied to various objective functions such as overall operating cost, voltage deviation, pollutant emissions, and power loss, which were evaluated under different cases. Regarding the valve point effect observed in case 1, the optimal response provided by MCO amounts to $781.9862. Upon assessing the emission costs in case 2, a resultant value of $810.6655 is determined. Considering the POZs in case 3, the aggregate cost is $781.7165. The minimum network loss is recorded in case 4, which is 2.0738 MW. By mitigating the voltage deviations in case 5 to 2.0738 p.u., the loss incurred exceeds twice that of the preceding case. Furthermore, due to its applicability to large-scale problems, the reserve constraint dynamic economic dispatch problem was chosen as an additional test case for the MCO. A backward-forward correction method was used to correct errors in three types of reserves, improving the solution quality. The effectiveness of the MCO in solving practical large-scale optimization problems was demonstrated by the results of the 10-unit and 30-unit dynamic economic dispatch, achieving lower cost values than previously published papers. In the 10-unit economic dispatch, the response surpasses the 15 top publications at $1,016,361. In the 30-unit dispatch, the MCO algorithm produced a unique solution of $3,048,405.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.