|
|
|
|
LEADER |
02802nam a2200505Ia 4500 |
001 |
0.3390-en15062288 |
008 |
220421s2022 CNT 000 0 und d |
020 |
|
|
|a 19961073 (ISSN)
|
245 |
1 |
0 |
|a State Estimation Fusion for Linear Microgrids over an Unreliable Network
|
260 |
|
0 |
|b MDPI
|c 2022
|
856 |
|
|
|z View Fulltext in Publisher
|u https://doi.org/10.3390/en15062288
|
520 |
3 |
|
|a Microgrids should be continuously monitored in order to maintain suitable voltages over time. Microgrids are mainly monitored remotely, and their measurement data transmitted through lossy communication networks are vulnerable to cyberattacks and packet loss. The current study leverages the idea of data fusion to address this problem. Hence, this paper investigates the effects of estimation fusion using various machine-learning (ML) regression methods as data fusion methods by aggregating the distributed Kalman filter (KF)-based state estimates of a linear smart microgrid in order to achieve more accurate and reliable state estimates. This unreliability in measurements is because they are received through a lossy communication network that incorporates packet loss and cyberattacks. In addition to ML regression methods, multi-layer perceptron (MLP) and dependent ordered weighted averaging (DOWA) operators are also employed for further comparisons. The results of simulation on the IEEE 4-bus model validate the effectiveness of the employed ML regression methods through the RMSE, MAE and R-squared indices under the condition of missing and manipulated measurements. In general, the results obtained by the Random Forest regression method were more accurate than those of other methods. © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Communications networks
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a cyberattack
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Cyber-attacks
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a data fusion
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Decision trees
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a estimation fusion
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Estimation fusion
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a internet of things
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Internet of things
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Kalman filter
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Kalman filters
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a machine learning
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Machine learning
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Measurement data
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Microgrid
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a packet loss
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Packet loss
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Packets loss
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Regression analysis
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Regression method
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Smart Micro Grids
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a smart microgrid
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a State estimates
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a state estimation
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a State estimation
|
650 |
0 |
4 |
|a Unreliable network
|
700 |
1 |
0 |
|a Herrero, J.G.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
0 |
|a López, J.M.M.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
0 |
|a Moshiri, B.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
0 |
|a Sadjadi, E.N.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
0 |
|a Soleymannejad, M.
|e author
|
700 |
1 |
0 |
|a Zadeh, D.S.
|e author
|
773 |
|
|
|t Energies
|