ArticleScientific reports2026
Design of a robust neural network-based controller for frequency stability in microgrids.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
The utilization of renewable energy sources (RESs), including solar and wind, in microgrids (MGs) present a critical challenge for maintaining system stability, mostly because of the elimination of mechanical inertia traditionally provided by synchronous generators. This study presents a controlling technique to guard disturbances in the islanded MG. To address this challenge, a multi-layer feedforward neural network (MLFFNN) is used to enhance the frequency stability of an islanded MG. The MLFFNN controller is compared to traditional controllers such as proportional-integral-derivative-acceleration (PIDA), proportional-integral-derivative (PID) and virtual inertia (VI) to evaluate its performance and effectiveness. Three scenarios are studied: load variations, RES fluctuations, and a combined case including both load variations and RES variability. A comparative study between VI, PID, PIDA, and MLFFNN controllers has been carried out, and shows that the MLFFNN combined with the VI controller is better than VI, PID, PIDA and MLFFNN controllers in all cases. Compared with the uncontrolled system, the MLFFNN with VI reduced the maximum frequency deviation from 4.92 to 3.86×[Formula: see text] Hz in the third case. Finally, the MLFFNN combined with the VI controller provided better performance for frequency stability.
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.