*5.4. Comparison with the Existing Results*

In order to verify the robustness and adaptability of the proposed algorithm, some comparison analyses will be given.

#### 5.4.1. Comparison results

In this section, the proposed consensus algorithm will be compared with Reference [42]. Without loss of generality, the parameter values of a and b use the ones in Reference [42] and we chose the time period 12:00–13:00 as an example. From Table 1, we can see that in this period, the load demand is 460 kW. By using the proposed method, the simulation results are shown in Figures 13 and 14.

**Figure 13.** Power output of the proposed method with the same parameters.

**Figure 14.** Power mismatch of the proposed method with the same parameters.

It can be seen from Figures 13 and 14 that after about the 60th iteration, the power demand can be satisfied by the output power of the generators, and compared with Reference [42], the proposed method can quickly reach convergence and a smooth transition curve. Besides, each node operates within its constraint condition.

## 5.4.2. Comparison with Different Parameters

In this section, the proposed method will be tested with the parameters shown in Table 2. The time period we chose is also 12:00–13:00. The simulation results are given by Figures 15 and 16.

**Figure 15.** Power output of the proposed method with different parameters.

**Figure 16.** Power output of the proposed method with different parameters.

Compared with Figures 13 and 14, the results in Figures 15 and 16 show better convergence performance, which means that the parameters of a and b can affect the iteration numbers, but cannot change the convergence performance. Thus, the proposed algorithm has a better robustness and adaptation.
