State Estimation for Power Systems
with Multilayer Perceptron Neural Networks
Ovidiu Ivanov and MihDL*DYULODú, Senior Member, IEEE

Abstract— The Static state estimation is widely used in power
systems for real time monitoring and analysis. Standard methods,
such as the weighted least squares (WLS) algorithm, require the
computation of bus admittance and Jacobian matrices and the
solution is found in an iterative process. This paper presents an
alternative for the classic state estimation (SE) algorithms, which
uses a multilayer perceptron for the state estimator. Results are
presented for the IEEE 14 bus system.
Index Terms— state estimation, multilayer perceptron
I. INTRODUCTION
T HE state estimator is the main tool used by system
operators around the world for real time monitoring of HV
transmission and distribution systems. Voltage and power flow
measurements are transmitted from key points in the system to
the dispatch center, where the state estimation algorithm is
applied and the system state is assessed. Standard algorithms
such as the weighted least squares (WLS) or Levenberg-
Marquardt compute the bus voltages, and then all the other
variables of interest such as losses and branch power flows [1].
For large systems, computing the Jacobian and gain matrices
can be time consuming.
Given their known approximation capabilities, artificial
neural networks (ANN) are used in power systems in a wide
range of applications [2]. State estimation algorithms which
use several types of neural networks were developed. A
Hopfield ANN approach is used in [3]. Radial Basis Networks
are used in [4] and [5]. Pseudo-measurements for state
estimation are modeled in [6] with multilayer perceptron
(MLP) feedforward networks. Cellular Neural Networks are
compared with MLPs for WAN state estimation in [7]. This
paper proposes a simple SE algorithm based on a MLP neural
network, which uses as inputs branch power flows measured in
key buses from the system. The outputs of the MLP are the bus
voltage magnitudes. The input/output data pairs for training
the ANN are obtained via load flow simulations. The MLP is
created using the MATLAB’s Neural Networks Toolbox, and
trained with the Resilient Propagation (RProp) algorithm.
Tests performed with the IEEE 14 bus system [8] give
promising results.
2YLGLX ,YDQRY DQG 0LKDL *DYULODú DUH with the Faculty of Electrical
Engineering, “Gheorghe Asachi” Technical University of Iasi, 21 D.
Mangeron Street, 700050, Iasi, ROMANIA
ovidiuivanov@ee.tuiasi.ro; mgavril@ee.tuiasi.ro).
978-1-4673-1572-2/12/$31.00 ©2012 IEEE
II. STATE ESTIMATION
Static state estimation (SE) algorithms compute the state
variables of an electrical network (bus voltages) using as
inputs measurements of bus active and reactive power
injections, branch power flows and bus voltage magnitudes
taken from the system. In modern real time monitoring
systems, where advanced devices such as phasor measurement
units are present, bus voltage angle measurements can also be
used to improve the precision of the results.
The mathematical model of the WLS algorithm states, in
brief, that if x is an unknown vector of n state variables (bus
voltage magnitudes and angles), z is a known vector of m
active and reactive bus power injections, branch active and
reactive power flows and voltage magnitude measurements
(n<m), h:RnxRm is a known non-linear function relating
measurements to states, W is a m-sized diagonal matrix of
measurement weights and e is a m-dimensional vector of
measurement errors, then the measurements vector can be
written as:
z h( x)  e, (1)
and the following objective function is minimized:
J ([ x]) >[ z ]  h([ x])@T ˜ W ˜ >[ z ]  h([ x])@ (2)
The state variables’ corrections are determined by
linearization, in an iterative process, using the well-known
Newton method.
The WLS estimation algorithm requires the computation of
the system’s bus admittance matrix, using the electrical
parameters of the network elements, and then the re-creation of
the Jacobian and gain matrices at each iteration. If the need to
work with such matrices could be avoided, the overall speed of
the calculation would improve, and the results would be
obtained faster. When the topology of the system does not
change, then the values of the state variables depend solely on
the used measurements. This is a suitable problem for the
approximation capabilities of the multilayer perceptron
artificial neural networks, which can detect the pattern of
voltage variations generated by the variation of the input
measurements, if it is fed with a set of relevant learning data.
(e-mail:
244
III. MULTILAYER PERCEPTRON NEURAL NETWORKS
The Multilayer Perceptrons (MLP) are feedforward
networks used for approximation and forecasting. They consist
of one input layer, one or more hidden layers and one output
layer. The sizes of input and output layers are determined by
the solved problem. Each neuron has weighted connections
with all the neurons from the adjacent layers.
MLPs learn tendencies and patterns hidden in input/output
data pairs that describe a given problem, and, if properly
trained, solve accurately the same problem for new input
values within the training domain.
At the core of any ANN lays the fundamental neuron, whose
output y is computed with:
§ ·
IV. OVERVIEW OF THE PROPOSED METHOD
The neural state estimator is applied in several steps.
For a given network, a number of power flow scenarios
need to be generated first, and the corresponding voltages must
be computed. The scenarios used for training the neural
network must cover a expected range for the P and Q bus
loads. Since using a deterministic approach of considering a
stepped variation of P and Q in each bus would result in
billions of scenarios to be calculated for a network with no
more than 10-20 buses, a different approach was implemented.
For the IEEE 14 bus test system used in the case study, [8]
gives reference values for the bus active and reactive powers
in the network. 50.000 combinations, 25.000 with maximum ±
50% random variation and 25.000 with maximum +50%
y F n  F ¨¨ ¦ w j ˜ x j  b ¸¸
© j ¹ were generated from these values.
where n is the net input of the neuron, F is the transfer
function, b is the neuron bias, xj are inputs and wj are weights.
Solving a problem with a MLP requires two stages: training
and generalization. In the training stage, the network is built
and the neurons’ weights and inputs are randomly initialized
and then refined in an iterative forward-backward process,
until the outputs of the MLP match closely with the desired
values, for all the models in the training data set.
There are several algorithms used for updating the weights
and biases in the training process, and their performances
depend on the solved problem. The best known is the Resilient
Propagation (RProp) algorithm [9], which computes, for M
input models, the error between the obtained (o) and desired
(d) output values as:
1 M (m) 2 random bus load scenarios were generated and the
E ¦ d  o (m)
2m 1
and then updates the weights at every iteration t, through
backpropagation, with:
wE
wijt 1 wijt  K ˜ wijt
wwij
where Ș is the learning rate. The neurons’ biases are corrected
in the same manner.
In the generalization stage, using the adapted weights and
biases, new inputs are presented to the MLP. If the training
was successful, the obtained outputs represent good
approximations of the exact solution corresponding to the
given inputs.
The ANN estimator presented in this paper can use as inputs
for the neural network measurements of branch power flows,
bus loads and voltages and its outputs are bus voltage
magnitudes. However, results obtained using only branch
power flow measurements were accurate enough to avoid
using any other measurement type.
(3) random variation (for simulating a possible load increase)
In the second step, generation of training data, the Newton-
Raphson load flow method was applied for all these scenarios,
and the bus voltages, branch load flows and slack bus power
injection were computed. The Power Factory version 14
software tool from DIGSilent GmbH [10] was used, because it
can easily compute on a single run multiple load scenarios for
a given network, with load data read from csv files.
In the third step, ANN training, the pairs of input
(measurements) and output (calculated bus voltages) were
defined, and a MLP network was built and trained. Always,
one hidden layer with 50 neurons was used. Preliminary tests
have shown that a larger hidden layer did not improve the
accuracy of the results. The hyperbolic tangent sigmoid
transfer function was used for the hidden neurons and the
network was trained over 250 cycles.
In the fourth step, generalization, a number of 5.000 new
(4)
measurements were presented to the trained ANN. The results
were compared to the voltages obtained for the same 5.000
load scenarios in the Power Factory simulation software.
One limitation of the proposed method is that the ANN
approach requires that the network structure and topology
must remain the same in the training and generalization stages.
(5) However, there is no need for an iterative process and the
results are obtained faster.
V. RESULTS
The first attempt to run the neural state estimator used the
measurements’ placement used in the WLS example provided
with the Power Education Toolbox software (PET) [11],
available at [12]. In the screen captures from Fig. 1 and 2, (V)
symbols at buses denote voltage magnitude measurements,
(PQ) symbols at buses signify bus power measurements, and
black arrows on branches denote branch power flow
measurements.
For this measurement placement scenario, however, the
MLP did not perform as expected. While the estimation
algorithm implemented in PET performs an accurate
estimation of the bus voltages, the proposed MLP estimator
 245

gave poor results for the 5.000 scenarios used for
generalization, with errors up to 10%.
The maximal and average percent deviation of the voltage
estimation in each bus for this case is presented in Table I.
The example used in PET has measurements spread all over
the network and some of them are bus loads and voltage
magnitude measurements. For the second measurement
placement scenario, a different approach was considered (Fig.
2). The measurements were limited to branch power flow
measurements taken from branches connected to only 7 buses
in the system: the slack bus (1), the buses where transformers
are connected (5), (6), (4), (9), a bus from the HV area, (3),
and a bus from the MV area, (13). The training and test data
sets have consisted of measurements from all the branches
connected to these buses. The ANN had 50 inputs, for 25 P
and 25 Q flow measurements, a number comparable with the
first scenario.
The estimation precision was considerably improved using
the new measurements set, with maximal errors up to 2% and
average errors less than 0.5%, as it can be seen in Table II.
Next, the influence of erroneous measurements on the
estimated voltages was tested. A random error of maximum ±
5% and ±10% was applied to the 5.000 inputs used in the
generalization tests. The voltages estimated by the same ANN
used in the case from Fig. 2 were compared to the reference
results obtained with DIGSilent Power Factory in the data
preparing stage. Results are presented in Table III for the ± 5%
case and in Table IV for the ± 10% case. With inaccurate
measurements, the estimation precision worsens. However, the
average bus voltage magnitude deviation does not exceed
1.21%.
Bus (7) was excluded from all the tables below because it is
an internal bus of a three-winding transformer and could not be
represented in the DIGSilent Power Factory simulations.

TABLE I TABLE II
ESTIMATION ERRORS FOR THE MLP ESTIMATOR WHEN USING THE PET ESTIMATION ERRORS FOR THE MLP ESTIMATOR WHEN USING ONLY BRANCH
MEASUREMENT PLACEMENT MEASUREMENTS IN 7 BUSES
max voltage average voltage max voltage average voltage
magnitude magnitude magnitude magnitude
Bus deviation [%] deviation [%] Bus deviation [%] deviation [%]
B01 0.00 0.00 B01 0.00 0.00
B02 4.18 1.30 B02 0.54 0.08
B03 8.25 2.45 B03 0.82 0.13
B04 7.84 2.22 B04 0.71 0.14
B05 6.57 1.97 B05 1.24 0.14
B06 7.31 2.12 B06 1.04 0.22
B08 8.35 2.29 B08 1.82 0.31
B09 9.14 2.67 B09 1.84 0.26
B10 10.01 2.71 B10 1.35 0.22
B11 8.67 2.50 B11 1.56 0.26
B12 8.49 2.45 B12 1.51 0.26
B13 9.56 2.59 B13 1.21 0.24
B14 10.24 3.01 B14 2.09 0.30

Fig. 1 The benchmark measurement set used in PET for WLS state estimation Fig. 2 The second measurement set used for MLP state estimation
246

TABLE III VI. CONCLUSION

ESTIMATION ERRORS FOR THE MLP ESTIMATOR WHEN USING ONLY BRANCH
MEASUREMENTS AND 5% RANDOM MESUREMENT ERRORS The ANN based state estimator can be a time saving
max voltage average voltage alternative to the classic state estimation algorithms, when the
magnitude magnitude operating configuration of the network does not change and
Bus deviation [%] deviation [%]
the estimated bus voltages vary only because of the loading
B01 0.00 0.00
conditions. Tests performed on the IEEE 14 bus network
B02 1.16 0.22 revealed a good estimation precision obtained even with
B03 2.03 0.42 erroneous measurements.
B04 1.69 0.38
B05 2.34 0.50
REFERENCES
B06 1.73 0.34
[1] F. C. Schweppe, J. Wildes, “Power System Static-State Estimation, Part
B08 2.92 0.50 I: Exact Model”, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Systems,
B09 2.86 0.49 Vol. PAS89, No. 1, January 1970, p. 120-125.
[2] M. T. Haque, and A.M. Kashtiban , “Application of Neural Networks in
B10 2.80 0.62 Power Systems; A Review”, World Academy of Science Engineering
B11 2.07 0.45 and Technology , Volume: 6, Issue: 12, 2005, p. 53-57
[3] W F. García-Lagos, G. Joya, F. J. Marín and F. Sandoval, “Hopfield
B12 2.89 0.44 neural networks for state estimation: parameters, efficient
B13 2.14 0.47 implementation and results”, E & I Elektrotechnik und
Informationstechnik, Volume 117, Number 1, 2000, pp. 4-7,
B14 3.14 0.66 [4] J.P. Pandey, D. Singh, “Application of radial basis neural network for
state estimation of power system networks”, International Journal of
TABLE IV Engineering, Science and Technology, Vol. 2, No. 3, 2010, pp. 19-28.
ESTIMATION ERRORS FOR THE MLP ESTIMATOR WHEN USING ONLY BRANCH [5] Amit Kumar and S. Chakrabarti, “ANN-based Hybrid State Estimation
MEASUREMENTS AND 10% RANDOM MESUREMENT ERRORS and Enhanced Visualization of Power Systems”, Innovative Smart Grid
max voltage average voltage Technologies - India (ISGT India), IEEE PES, 1-3 Dec. 2011, pp. 78-83
magnitude magnitude [6] E. Manitsas et. al., “Distribution System State Estimation Using an
Bus deviation [%] deviation [%] Artificial Neural Network Approach for Pseudo Measurement
Modeling”, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. PP, issue 99,
B01 0.00 0.00 2012
B02 1.95 0.40 [7] B. Luitel, Venayagamoorthy, G.K., “Wide area monitoring in power
systems using cellular neural networks”, IEEE Symposium on
B03 3.85 0.82 Computational Intelligence Applications In Smart Grid (CIASG), 11-15
April 2011, pp. 1-8.
B04 3.22 0.67
[8] online resource, http://www.ee.washington.edu/research/pstca/ available
B05 4.29 0.98 on June 2012
[9] D. Rumelhart, J. L. McClelland, and the PDP research group. (editors),
B06 2.40 0.53
“Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of
B08 4.00 0.80 cognition”, Volume 1: Foundations. MIT Press, 1986.
[10] http://www.digsilent.de/index.php/products-powerfactory.html,
B09 3.76 0.82 available on June 2012
B10 5.42 1.14 [11] L. Zhao , A. Abur , “Multiarea State Estimation Using Synchronized
Phasor Measurements”, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, Vol. 20,
B11 4.29 0.77 No.2, May 2005, pp. 611-617
B12 3.92 0.74 [12] online resource, http://indigo.ece.neu.edu/~abur/pet, available on June
2012
B13 5.11 0.85
B14 6.57 1.21