ArticlePloS one2026
Optimal design and operation of Photovoltage distributed generators and shunt compensators for the Vietnam alternative current distribution network to reduce annual energy loss.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
This study presents the application of two novel meta-heuristic algorithms, including the Fungal Growth Optimizer (FGO) and Animated Oat Optimization Algorithm (AOO), to optimize the placement of DGs and SCBs for power loss reduction in three alternative current distribution networks (ACDNs), including a practical ACDN with 55 nodes in Vietnam, besides the two IEEE standard ACDNs. In the study, placement of DGs and SCBs on the three grids is conducted in two phases, including the designing phase and the operational phase. In the designing phase, DGs and SCBs were optimized in their placement on the grids by the two algorithms in various scenarios with different DG configurations. The results achieved through scenarios indicate that AOO completely outperforms FGO in terms of the optimal total active power loss values (TAPL) and the stability of the outputs. Particularly, in the two scenarios conducted on the IEEE 69-node, the TAPL achieved by AOO is better than FGO, 3.65% for the first scenario and 72.28% for the second scenario. In the other two scenarios conducted on the IEEE 85-node, AOO still proves its high effectiveness over FGO by reaching the better TAPL at 6.02% in Scenario 1 and 44.88% in Scenario 2. Lastly, AOO is continuously superior to FGO in the four scenarios in the Vietnam ACDN, with 55-node by 1.04% in Scenario 1, 19.52% in Scenario 2, 7.07% in Scenario 3, and 69.60% in Scenario 4. Next in the operational phase, AOO is reapplied to optimize the power output of PVDGs and SCBs within an average day of the first month in the four quarters of the year, with load demand variation and dynamic supplied power from PVDGs in four scenarios with different settings of PVDGs and SCBs. The results clearly reveal that the operational Scenario 4 with PVDGs is configured to supply both active and reactive power to the grid, along with SCBs, which offer the best value of energy loss in the three quarters, except for the third one, where the operational Scenario 2 is the most suited for energy loss.
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.