پاسخ به ریوایز مقاله برق در مورد تعیین برنامه ریزی بهینه ی نیروگاههای مجازی با استفاده از روش نش-زنتیک

---

شرح پروژه

سلام

متن مقاله ی متصل شده فرستاده شده است و توصیه داورها نیز به قرار زیر است:

Reviewer #1: The paper is well written  and an appreciable work is done, however, there are some doubts, comments and suggestions to be replied/incorporated given as follows: 1. The paper needs the language corrections and improvement at several places.  2.The abstract part needs the optimal outcome of the proposed method to be given in this part. 3. The introductory part is mainly the literature review which may be given in a tabular form and some latest reference may be added.  The state of the art of the current area may be covered in the introductory part. 4. The references has been randomly quoted, they need to be in chronological/ascending order. Also, few more latest reference may be added. 5. The system description  and ratings of the constituents (WFs, one PV, one TST, one FC, two CHP units and ESDs considering NE-GA) of the proposed MG system must be given in section 2. 6. Fig. 2(a) - (e)  need  explained properly  and justified. The peak load is generally in the day timings while Fig.2 (a) gives different result, why this is so..? Also, in Fig.2 (b), how the market price is varying, what is the base for that? 7. Re-write eq (1), (13)  and (15). Also, eqns. (1)-(12) just given, no conclusion is made about them. 8. Sections 2.3, 2.3.1  and 2.3.2 are how correlated with proposed work  and what is the outcome ? Which property of GA has been used in this particular work? 9. Figs. 3, 6  and 7 missing. Also, system specifications of the proposed MG system & Simulation model are missing in Section-4. 10. Describe, when the demand is 12MW at 12 hours, then how the market price is too much high ? Also, justify how to full fill the load and supply demands ? Why the wind farm generation bid is zero at 6 hours and same for TST at 20 hours ? 11.  Tables 1, 2, 3, Fig.5 (a)-(f)  and Fig. 8 (a)-(f) need to be justified and well explained. The results may be compared with standard/recent work in the proposed area. 12. Why the exchange power is negative? What is the use of negative exchange power? In fig.5 (f), the exchange power is negative while in Table 1, there is no negative exchange power, why this is so…? 13. There is no discussion about the efficiency of the proposed MG system. How the profit of different energy resources is obtained in three DR programs? If the profit is going negative in Fig.8(f), then what is the use of the proposed MG system? 14. The conclusion needs to be elaborated  and the outcome of the work should reflect. How in the proposed method, the profit growth related to the exchanged power between MG and grid, FC and PV unit with 9, 8 and 4.6 percent is increased ? Why there is no mention of the efficiency  and the order of the utility of the constituents of the MG system?     Reviewer #2, The authors present Optimal Scheduling of a Micro-grid through hybrid method of Nash Equilibrium - Genetic Algorithm, the topic is interesting and well presented. However, some point can be considered to further improve the manuscript.  1) The abstract can be revised to include more details of the proposed approach. Authors can improve the abstract by including the existing challenges, motivations and outcomes of the paper. 2) Introduction section is incomplete. It should include four key components: motivation, literature survey, contributions, and the organization of paper. Please modify this section accordingly. 3) Figures 5 and 6 missing. 4) The simulation results should be extended to support the proposed approach effectively. Authors need to add more illustrative figures as well as some comparison tables to clearly highlight the key findings by simulation results. 6) Some of the related studies are missing from the literature survey. Authors should include some more studies to enrich the introduction section. 7) In order to make the conclusion section more clear, authors need to include the point-by-point findings of this article. The current conclusion is written very wide and it is not easy to maintain the key findings. 8) Please talk about the future work briefly in the conclusion section. Reviewer #2: Needs revision, accepted fulfilling my comments.

این پروژه شامل 1 فایل مهم است، لطفا قبل از ارسال پیشنهاد حتما نسبت به بررسی این فایل اقدام فرمایید.

مهارت ها و تخصص های مورد نیاز

---

---