A Robust Artificial Bee Colony-Based Load Frequency Control for Hydro-Thermal Interconnected Power System
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)
only in Line 77, it is not clearly expressed I think: "falling in local optima"
Consider re-writing this bit fro greater clarity.
Author Response
Reviewer-1: Comments and Suggestions for Authors
only in Line 77, it is not clearly expressed I think: "falling in local optima" Consider re-writing this bit for greater clarity.
This comment is considered in the revised manuscript, it has been rewritten as follows:
“getting the local optima which is defined as the solution within neighboring set of candidates”
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report (New Reviewer)
The paper is very well explained and interesting. To improve the quality, I have some suggestions, as follows.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of an artificial bee colony compared to other artificial intelligence techniques? Please address this in the introduction.
In the digital simulation results section, similarities and differences between the previous studies should be discussed and the reasons for them should be pointed out. Regrettably, I could not find these discussions in the article.
What are the limitations and future directions of this study? This issue should be highlighted somewhere in the text of the manuscript.
Please take 3 digits after the comma in the results.
Author Response
Reviewer-2 Comments and Suggestions for Authors
The paper is very well explained and interesting. To improve the quality, I have some suggestions, as follows.
Thank you, sir, for your impression, the authors hope covering your comments well.
1- What are the advantages and disadvantages of an artificial bee colony compared to other artificial intelligence techniques? Please address this in the introduction.
This comment is considered by adding the following paragraph:
“The ABC approach is characterized by flexibility, robustness, simplicity, ease of implementation, ability to solve complex problems, and ability to discover the local optima. On the other hand, the ABC suffers from requirement higher number of objective function evaluation, this makes the algorithm slow, especially in complex problems.”
2- In the digital simulation results section, similarities and differences between the previous studies should be discussed and the reasons for them should be pointed out. Regrettably, I could not find these discussions in the article.
This following comment is added:
“The SCA has been used to design integral-based LFC installed with thermal/thermal connected system [32]. The authors applied this approach on the considered hydro/thermal system with doubly fed induction generator. However, it is different from this work as ISE was used as the target while the designed controller is integral one, moreover the connected power system is different from that considered in this work. However, the analysis of many load disturbances is the only need that is similar to our analysis.”
3- What are the limitations and future directions of this study? This issue should be highlighted somewhere in the text of the manuscript.
This comment is considered by adding the following paragraph in conclusion section:
“The challenge facing the ABC-based methodology is the slowness with complex processes, therefore enhancing the performance of the approach via opposition-based learning technique is recommended in the future works. Moreover, multi-interconnected system with multi renewable energy sources will be considered in the next work.”
4- Please take 3 digits after the comma in the results.
This comment is considered in the revised manuscript
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This subject seems very interesting to researchers in load frequency control power systems and dynamic service provisioning.
The use of LFC and AI ABC is commendable.
The following are the main issues that needs to be addressed.
- The main contribution of the paper was not well highlighted in the abstract, especially as regards the methodology and numerical results. How does the proposed scheme compare with existing works in related fields. The abstract is scanty!
2. The tittle is very lengthy and poorly crafted. This needs serious revision
3. The authors did not highlight the key research gaps in the literature thereby not positioning the paper in context.
4. The authors did not show clear problem formulation.
5. Figure 2 should be decomposed into a functional algorithm
6. Figure 3 appears overtly simplified and lacks the expected interfaces and layers.
7. Section 4 appears very shallow with no generic tuning parameters.
8. Absence of computational complexity analysis, optimality, and threat to validity.
9. lack of validation comparison with other frequency control schemes
10. Overall, the technical quality of the paper is very shallow and does not appeal to interested readers.
Reviewer 2 Report
Abstract:
Line 12: " ... during a wide range." Of what? Operational conditions? systems setups? A bit clumsy - so do rewrite this sentence.
Line 16: please rewrite this - it is not clear what you mean by "... deviation from the error".
and the PID acronym is NOT spelled out in the Abstract - as it should, like the others employed
1. Introduction:
Lines 26-27: do rewrite this for clarity and expression's sake.
Line 28: what do you by "troubles". Power disruptions? Power quality issues?
Line 25-29: what do you mean / express more precisely what "balance [or perhaps balancing] operations" means
Line 33: ... "studies have focused ..."
Line 34: " ... algorithms. Some of these studies can be summarized ...
Line 42: "in [4]."
Line 44: "in [5].
Line 48: "in [7] while ...
Line 50: "... multiplied by the absolute error"...
Line 66: "... Moreover, a hybrid ..."
Line 66-67: "this research" - you mean your research presented in the present article, or some other previously published research [if so, do make clear which exactly, with in-text referencing at that exact point]
from Line 69 onwards: are you talking about the research reported on in this original manuscript? If so, this structurally needs to be made clear, with a clear signposting and new paragraph
Line 72: "... simulated by the MATLA/SIMULINK ..."
Line 73: " controller. The ..."
2. Model of interconnected hydro/thermal system
Line 82: "... by a first-order ..."
Line 84: what do you mean by "perversion"?
Line 92: "equations [Eqs.]"
Line 117: again, what do you mean by"perversion"?
3. Artificial bee colony overview approach
Line 126: requires [not: required]
Line 127: "from the analogy of the intelligent behavior of ..."
Line 129: "individuals, and the bees ..."
4. Digital simulation results
Line 191: why do you use "however" here - is there a contradiction? If not, do use "in addition".
Conclusion:
Line 250: "with exploring how to achieve a strong improvement ...
Line 252: "... comprises of ..."
Line 257: "over-shoot .."
Line 258: ... is superior" ... BY HOW MUCH? TESTED FOR SIGNIFICANCE HOW?
References:
[1] Energy Conversion and Management
[2] Ain Shams Engineering Journal
[5] Journal of Advanced Research
[7] Applied Soft Computing
[8] Applied Soft Computing
[11] International Journal of Energy Research
[19] ISA Transactions
[27] Journal of Global Optimization
