Optimal Reconfiguration of Power System
With Fuzzy ARTMAP Neural Networks
Shahram Javadi Mehrdad Setayesh Nazar
Azad Islamic University Power and Water University
Central Branch of Technology
Tehran-Iran Tehran- Iran
Abstract- Optimal Reconfiguration of power system is one of
the most important duties of control centers. It is an essential
task for power system management in normal and
emergency conditions. Accuracy of this procedure is
essential to overcome the subsequences of static and dynamic
security constraints. However, because of limited time
between on line calculation procedure and implementation of
the optimization output results, speed of calculation is very
important. To overcome this problem, a shift from on line
calculations to off line calculations can be considered and a
pattern recognition procedure for online operation based on
off line database may be used. It has been shown that back
propagation neural networks can achieve the pattern
recognition goals for different conditions, but one of the most
drawbacks of the mentioned method is their slow
convergence. This may reduce the effectiveness of ANN,
because many ANN must be trained for different topology
and load conditions of system. A neural network architecture
that does not suffer from the above-mentioned drawbacks is
the Fuzzy ARTMAP (Adaptive Resonance Theory-
supervised predictive Mapping) neural network. In this
paper, implementation of the Fuzzy ARTMAP neural
network for defined problem has been proposed. In our
proposed algorithm, genetic algorithm optimization for
optimal reconfiguration has been used for off line stage. The
performance and the efficiency of proposed method have
been investigated using the IEEE 30-bus test system.
Keywords: Reconfiguration, SCOPF, Fuzzy ARTMAP,
Neural Networks, Optimization
1. INTRODUCTION
Static security assessment is one of the most important power
system control centers functions [1]. A computational function
of security assessment is the feasibility study of power system
operating point after occurring of the credible contingencies. In
this procedure, which is named n-1 secure point investigation,
the security constraints are considered in optimal power flow
(OPF) calculations. This procedure is known as Security
Constrained Optimal Power Flow (SCOPF).
The optimal power flow can be used to optimize a certain group
of objectives at planning or operational stage. The control
variables may behave as continuous variables such as active and
reactive power or voltages of generating bus, or discrete
variables such as switching of bus couplers, capacitors, reactors
and lines. In normal condition, an OPF does not consider
security constraints; however, in the presence of security
constraints the implementation of the OPF results can cause
severe problems [2]. Practically, because of the huge number of
security constraints, these constraints are simplified. On the
other hand, discrete control variables such as line switching can
reduce many security constraints and generate a new state space
for solving of an unsolvable SCOPF. The mentioned ability
cannot be studied in a standard SCOPF.
Z. Tabatabaei Zadeh
Azad Islamic University
Central Branch
Tehran-Iran
Every effective switching will generate a new state space with
its new contingencies based on load variations and these new
states cannot to be considered, by a standard SCOPF.
The present paper describes a novel approach to consider the
switching ability of system in SCOPF calculation and online
pattern recognition of the most secure condition of system after
occurrence of a credible contingency. In this paper, the
mathematical formulation of scope is explained in section 2.
Section 3, 4 and 5 presents the computational flowchart and a
genetic algorithm for topology optimization and the Fuzzy
ARTMAP NN algorithm, respectively. Section 6 and 7
describes the simulation results and conclusions, respectively.
2. SCOPF MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
Mathematical formulation of SCOPF can be presented as [3-5]:
Min C = f ( x , u, z ) (1)
S .t : g ( x , u, z ) = 0
h( x , u , z ) ≤ 0
h j ( x , u, z ) ≤ 0
j ∈ {1,..., n}
where f(x,y,z) is the system operational cost. x and u are state
space and control variables, respectively. z is discrete control
vector, and n is the number of credible contingencies. g(x, u, z)
and h(x, u, z) are the load flow and normal condition static
security constraint set of the system, respectively. h j ( x , u, z ) is
the contingency security constraint set of the system. If with
corrective actions for jth contingency, h j ( x , u, z ) is satisfied, that
topology is secure. The static security constraints of SCOPF in
normal condition of operation can be explained as:
Vimin ≤ Vi ≤ Vimax i=1 to nb (2)
PGimin ≤ PGi ≤ PGimax i=1 to ng (3)
QG imin ≤ QG i ≤ QG imax i=1 to ng (4)
Pi ≤ Pimax i=1 to nl (5)
t imin ≤ t i ≤ t imax i=1 to nt (6)
The above formulas explain upper and lower limits of voltages,
generator active powers, generator reactive power, transmission
line and taps of transformer respectively. nb, ng, nl and nt are
number of buses, generation buses, lines and transformers,
respectively. The above constraints can be summarized as h(x,
u, z). In the presence of a contingency the mentioned formulas
can be expressed as h j ( x , u, z ) , which j denotes jth contingency.
Practically the SCOPF formulation is solved for a fixed z .The
aim of this paper is encountering the z variable to manage the
system operating point to a secure point. For precise description
of u control variables, we can describe these continuous
variables:
• Changing of the terminal voltage of generators with
excitation system.
• Changing of the phase of phase shifters.
• Changing of the active power of generators.
• Changing of the tap of transformer, which has a discrete
behavior but can be formulated as continues variable and
then rounded to its near discrete quantity.
• Changing of the operating point of synchronous condenser.
795
In addition, we can describe the following variables as discrete
variables:
• Switching of capacitor banks and reactors.
• Switching of lines.
• Switching of bus couplers.
Introducing discrete variables and the ability of changing them
for a certain operating point, the state space of the optimization
problem is very larger than a standard SCOPF. Therefore, the
above formulation may not reach to a feasible solution for on
line computations and its full computations must be done at off
line stage. Now we introduce an off line computation stage.
3. OFFLINE AND ONLINE COMPUTATIONAL STAGES
For off line computation stage, the following steps are
proposed:
• Determination of the number of the most probable
system topology for different load conditions.
o Contingency ranking for that topology.
o Optimal switching for the most credible
contingencies of mentioned topology and
finding of SCOPF feasible solution.
• Identification of homogeneous topologies for different
load conditions.
• Learning of fuzzy ARTMAP neural network for each
homogeneous optimal topology.
For online computation of system secure points, the following
steps are proposed:
• Data acquisition from state estimation algorithm.
• Calculation of load level and contingency severity
index.
• Optimal topology identification by fuzzy ARTMAP
neural network.
For on line calculation stage, load level and contingency
severity index can be calculated and finally these data are used
as the inputs of the Fuzzy ARTMAP neural network.
4. GENETIC ALGORITHM WITH VARIABLE FITNESS
FUNCTION FOR OPTIMUM RECONFIGURATION
For optimal reconfiguration of the system and finding of a
feasible solution of SCOPF, we propose a genetic algorithm
(GA) optimization method. This method has the following
abilities:
• State space full search ability.
• Multi objective optimization with hard and soft limits.
The discrete variables are selected as:
Li = 1 if the ith line is used, else it equals 0 (7)
Ci = 1 if the ith element shunt is used, else it equals 0 (8)
BC i = 1 if the ith bus coupler is used, else it equals 0 (9)
Direct coding of discrete variables to chromosomes will
produce a large number of impossible GA input data. For
solving this problem, the coding procedure has the following
assumptions:
• Bus coupler and transformer are special representation of
line.
• Searching space of GA must not has any impossible coded
data, so any impossible generated data will be removed
from search set.
For implementation of operational constraints in optimization
process, they will be presented as penalty factors. For this
problem, we propose the following penalty factor:
1. Deviation from normal voltages, which is calculated as:
nvv
ν = ∑ (Vi − Vimin )2 (10)
i =1
nvv = number of busses with unmoral voltage.
If voltage drops exceeded from a threshold value, ν value will
be set as M1, which is a great number.
Now, we can propose the penalty factor as:
796
P = C 1 .ν (11)
C 1 is weighting factor. The final optimization fitness function
can be proposed as:
Max Q = M − C 1 .ν (12)
M = a great number.
The optimization process is calculated for different load and
control availability levels (TPC) as shown in figure 1. The TPC
is proposed as [3]:
m n
TPC = ∑ PRC j + ∑ PPC j
j =1 j =1 (13)
PRC = sum of available active controllers.
PPC = sum of available reactive controllers.
m= number of available active controllers.
n= number of available reactive controllers.
At off line computation stage, different level of PRC and PPC
is assumed.
5. FUZZY ARTMAP NEURAL NETWORK
The Fuzzy ARTMAP (Adaptive Resonance Theory-supervised
predictive Mapping) neural network is an architecture that can
learn arbitrary mappings from analog or digital inputs of any
dimensionality to analog or digital outputs of any
dimensionality [6]. The architecture applies incremental
supervised learning of recognition categories and
multidimensional maps in response to arbitrary sequences of
analog or binary input vectors, which may represent fuzzy or
crisp set of features [7-9]. The Fuzzy ARTMAP NN consists of
two Fuzzy ART modules designated as Fuzzy ARTα and
Fuzzy ARTβ , as well as an inter Fuzzy ART module, as shown
in Figure 2. Inputs are presented at the Fuzzy ARTα module,
while the outputs are presented at the Fuzzy ARTβ module. The
Inter-Fuzzy ART module includes a MAP field, whose purpose
is to determine whether the mapping between the presented
input and output is the desired one. The F0α layer receives the
input vector α and produces the complement encoded input
vector I. The complement encoded vector I is created as:
I = (α ,α c ) = (α 1 ,...,α Ma ,α 1c ,...,α Ma
c
) (14)
α ic = 1 − α i ,1 ≤ i ≤ M α (15)
Where M α is the dimensionality of the input vector α .
Hence, the F0α layer acts as a preprocessor to the Fuzzy
ARTα architecture. The vector I is subsequently applied at the
layer. In most cases, the complement encoding is not necessary
for the output vector ο . F2α in addition, F2β are the layers
where compressed representations of the input patterns and the
output patterns are established respectively. Index i is used to
designate the nodes in the F1α layer, index j is used to designate
nodes in the F2α layer, index k is used to designate nodes in the
Fuzzy MAP layer ( Fαβ ) and the F2β layer, index l is used to
designate nodes in the F1β layer. Hence W jα = ( W1αj ,...,W(α2 Ma ) j ) is
the vector of bottom-up weights emanating from node i in the
F1α layer to node j in the F2α layer. The vector of top-down
weights emanating from node j to node i is denoted as W jα =
( W1αj ,...,W(α2 Ma ) j ).
Finally, W j = (W j1 ,...,W jβ ) is the vector of weights emanating
from node j in F2α and converging to the nodes of the MAP
layer Fαβ . A vector whose components are the top-down
weights emanating from a single node in F2α / F2β is called a
template of the Fuzzy ARTα / β module.
An uncommitted template is defined to be the vector of top-
down weights associated with a node in F2α / F2β which has not
yet been chosen to represent an input/output pattern. Each of the
components of an uncommitted template is equal to one. The
vigilance parameters, ς α / β constraints the maximum size of the
compressed representations of the input/output patterns. The
range of the vigilance parameter is the interval [0,1].
Small values of the vigilance parameter results in coarse
clustering of the patterns, while large values lead to fine
clustering. The choice parameters τ α / β affect the choice of
node. The range of the choice parameter is the interval ( 0, ∞ ).
Realistically, the value should not exceed a value that is
proportional to the numbers M α and M β respectively.
6. RESULTS
For case study, we have modified the IEEE 30-bus as follow:
• Inserting of following lines for switching:
1. Line #42: R=0.09382, X=0.05917, Y=0.0264
2. Line #43: R=0.04699, X=0.19797,Y=0.0219
3. Line #44: R=0.05811, X=0.0187, Y=0.0187
4. Line #45: R=0.05403, X=0.22304, Y=0.0246
5. Line #46: R=0.05693, X=0.17308, Y=0.0171
6. Line #47: R=0.06701, X=0.17103, Y=0.0173
7. Line #48: R=0.0671,X=0.17103, Y=0.0173
• The maximum line power limit is assumed as 1.25 per unit
of Surge Impedance Load (SIL) of that line for SCOPF
calculations.
• C1, M1 and M are assumed 1EXP4, 1EXP3 and 40EXP4,
respectively.
Table 1 depicts genetic algorithm optimization results, and the
parentheses show the optimal topology number. Based on GA
optimization stage, the number of homogenous topology equals
eight.
The Fuzzy ARTMAP network performance depends on the
values of the parameters τ α / β and ς α / β . In order to identify an
“optimal” set of network parameter values for the problem at
hand, we conducted a number of experiments. The training set
consists of all normal condition and first order contingencies for
three levels of loads and controller availability.
Figure 3 and 4 depicts the input and output layers of Fuzzy
ARTMAP architecture for learning and pattern recognition
stages, respectively.
The number of training set is 3*3*41, which denotes load level,
TPC and severity index of contingencies, respectively. A basic
training set is used for the network parameter evaluation. This
training set includes load level, controller availability, and
severity index of contingency. The 3*3*41 learning data set is
spread over state space. For each pattern recognition stage, load
level, real time TPC and contingency severity index are used as
inputs.
For each experiment, ς α is chosen as 0, 0.3, 0.7, or 0.9, while
ς β is chosen as 0.96, 0.9989, 1.0, and τ a = τ b is used values of
0.0165, 1.58, 6.7, 9.3 by trial and error search.
The best result achieved was ς α = 0.0, τ α = τ β = 9.1, and ς β =
0.96. These parameter values create a small network with 18
nodes in F2α and 8 nodes in F2 β . The training time required to
train the Fuzzy ARTMAP neural network was short (a few
minutes) compared to several minutes of training for the Co
Active Neuro Fuzzy Inference System (CANFIS) [3]. The order
of training set to Fuzzy ARTMAP affects its performance.
Therefore, by training 8 networks with the same training set, we
expected a performance improvement.
The training time of networks was 6.24 minutes for a Pentium
IV 2.4 GHz processor. Table 2 and 3 depicts the Fuzzy
ARTMAP neural network pattern recognition of system
optimum topology for load level 0.9 and 0.7, respectively.
In these tables the optimum topology number in the presence of
the maximum, normal and minimum controller availability, are
depicted.
Based on GA optimization stage, the fuzzy ARTMAP neural
network can recognizes the optimal topology of the system for
reconfiguration. The recognition time is about 0.01 seconds for
a Pentium IV 2.4 GHz processor, which is suitable for real time
operation.
At on line pattern recognition stage, total number of
recognitions is 246 cases and the fuzzy ARTMAP neural
network recognition error is about eight cases or 3.24 percent,
which can be reduced by appropriate learning of the network.
8. CONCLUSIONS
In an earlier work [3], we used the CANFIS to recognize the
optimum topology of system. In this paper, we applied the
Fuzzy ARTMAP NN to the pattern recognition problem and
conducted identical experiments. The results of the Fuzzy
ARTMAP NN are better than the CANFIS results. In addition,
the training time required by the Fuzzy ARTMAP NN is a small
fraction of the CANFIS training time. Experiments have shown
that by using eight networks for recognition, the network’s
performance is significantly improved compared to a single
network. Especially the fluctuations are significantly decreased.
By grouping homogenous topologies, the pattern recognition
performance is improved.
For on line pattern recognition, total number of recognitions is
246 cases and the fuzzy ARTMAP neural network recognition
error is about 8 cases or 3.24 percent, which can be reduced by
appropriate learning of the network. Finally, the input parameter
set has a significant effect on the performance of the network.
9. REFERENCES
[1] Javier Contreras, Arturo Losi, Mario Russo, Felix F. Wu:
Simulation and Evaluation of Optimization Problem
Solutions in Distributed Energy Management Systems, IEEE
Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 17, no. 1, Feb. (2007).
[2] G.Schnyder, H.Glavitsch: Security enhancement using an
optimal switching power flow, IEEE transactions, vol 5, no 2,
pp. 674-681, (1990).
[3] Setayesh Nazar, Mehrdad :On line pattern recognition of
optimal topology of power system in the presence of security
constraints, International Journal of Science and Technology,
spring 2003, pp 23-41.
[4] M. Adibi (Editor): Power System Restoration -
Methodologies and Implementation Strategies, IEEE Press,
NJ, (2000).
[5] D.N. Kosterev, C.W Taylor, W.A Mittelstadt: Model
validation for the August 10, 1996 WSCC system outage,
IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol.14, no.3, pp. 967-
979, Aug. (1999).
[6] Stefan E. Skarman, “Short-Term Electrical Load
Forecasting Using a Fuzzy ARTMAP Neural Network,”
Master’s thesis, University of Central Florida, Orlando, 1997.
[7] William J. Gerber, “Parametric analysis of electrical load
forecasting using artificial neural networks,” Master’s
Thesis, University of Central Florida, Nov. 1996.
[8] M.H.Hassoun: Fundamentals of artificial neural network,
MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, (1995).
[9] G. A Carpenter, S. Grossberg, N. Markuzon, H. Reynolds,
and D. B Rosen: Fuzzy ARTMAP: A neural network
architecture for incremental supervised learning of analog
multi dimensional maps,” IEEE Transactions on Neural
Networks, vol. 3, no. 5, pp. 698-712, Sept. (1992).
[10] K.L.Lo, M.A.Bismil: A comparison of MW ranking
methods, Electric power system research, 15, pp.157-171,
(1998).
797
 Figure 1. Proposed algorithm flowchart for Fuzzy ARTMAP neural network learning stage.

Figure 2. Block diagram of Fuzzy ARTMAP neural network

758
 Figure 3. Input layers of Fuzzy ARTMAP architecture for learning and recognition stages.

Figure 4. Output layers of Fuzzy ARTMAP architecture

Table 1. Genetic algorithm fitness function optimized results and optimal topology patterns for different load levels and controller
availability.
Contingency Load factor=1 Load factor=1 Load factor=0.8 Load factor=0.8 Load factor=0.6 Load factor=0.6
Max. Optimum Max. Optimum Max. Optimum
1 3.53E4 0.2067E4(7) 2.559E4 0.351E4(1) 1.328E4 2.037E3(6)
2 1.118E4 0.723E4(5) 1.257E4 0.481E4(4) 4.763E3 1E3(5)
3 4.159E3 1.005E3(3) 7.81E3 4.22E3(4) 2.49E3 1.01E3(2)
4 1.0297E4 0.1181E4(3) 1.2E4 0.376E4(4) 4.46E3 9.954E2(3)
5 1.725E4 0.2364E4(7) 1.576E4 0.426E4(1) 7.275E3 2.336E3(6)
6 6.54E3 2.55E3(1) 8.77E3 4.36E3(4) 3.65E3 2.56E3(1)
7 6.4E3 2.34E3(1) 7.08E3 3.8E3(1) 3.639E3 2.42E3(1)
8 2.99E3 1.87E3(4) 7.07E3 3.85E3(1) 1.79E3 2.15E3(-)
9 7.12E3 1.67E3(4) 9.55E3 3.95E3(1) 3.24E3 1.948E3(4)
10 2.506E3 1.138E3(4) 7.21E3 3.71E3(1) 1.5E3 1.57E3(-)
11 3.87E3 2.239E3(4) 6.67E3 4.29E3(1) 2.63E3 2.24E3(4)
12 3.81E3 2.69E3(4) 7.05E3 4.11E3(1) 2.38E3 2.12E3(4)
13 3.34E5 0.0576E3(5) 2.66E5 0.0249E5(5) 3.13E6 0.0046E6(4)
14 9.83E3 2.53E3(4) 9.04E3 3.87E3(1) 4.57E3 2.36E3(6)
15 6.11E3 0.8999E3(2) 7.9E3 3.96E3(1) 3.24E3 0.894E3(4)
16 3.024E5 0.086E5(6) 1.65E6 0.0041E6(7) 9.88E4 0.256E4(2)
17 2.31E3 0.7059E3(7) 7.29E3 4E3(1) 1.18E3 0.555E3(2)
18 4.36E3 2.402E3(6) 7.8E3 4.17E3(1) 1.985E3 1.73E3(5)
19 2.927E3 1.23E3(4) 7.07E3 4.15E3(1) 1.835E3 1.17E3(1)
20 2.17E3 0.75E3(-) 7.095E3 3.67E3(1) 1.39E3 0.705E3(4)
21 2.885E3 1.289E3(6) 6.87E3 3.678E3(1) 1.88E3 1.28E3(5)
22 2.689E3 1.251E3(7) 7.01E3 3.675E3(1) 1.65E3 1.29E3(4)
23 2.67E3 1.296E3(2) 6.97E3 3.671E3(1) 1.709E3 1.2902E3(6)
24 3.26E3 0.9954E3(2) 6.53E3 4.12E3(1) 1.8E3 0.995E3(6)
25 3.93E7 1.304E3(6) 6.61E 4.121E3(1) 1.92E3 1.14E3(2)
26 2.098E3 0.74E3(-) 7E3 4.02E3(1) 1.297E3 0.905E3(5)
27 4.057E3 1.31E3(3) 8.42E3 4.16E3(1) 1.63E3 1.733E3(-)
28 2.37E3 0.966E3(4) 7.38E3 3.7E3(1) 1.56E3 1.32E3(4)
29 2.342E3 1.466E3(6) 7.07E3 3.8E3(1) 1.53E3 1.69E3(-)
30 3.82E3 1.263E3(4) 7.39E3 4.19E3(1) 1.704E3 1.162E3(4)
31 3.75E3 0.951E3(5) 7E3 3.996E3(1) 1.819E3 1.16E3(4)
32 2.726E3 0.898E3(5) 7.16E3 3.83E3(1) 1.28E3 0.875E3(5)
33 2.31E3 0.8146E3(4) 7.69E3 4.11E3(1) 0.568E3 1.0413E3(4)
34 1.68E15 0.81E3(4) 2.69E14 4.123E3(4) 1.513E14 1.02E3(4)
35 3.199E3 1.645E3(3) 6.92E3 5E3(1) 2.04E3 1.69E3(3)
36 1.033E4 0.278E4(4) 1.07E3 0.47E4(1) 4.97E3 1.86E3(4)
37 2.97E3 1.224E3(3) 7.68E3 4.31E3(1) 2.14E3 1.54E3(4)
38 3.14E3 1.663E3(4) 7.86E3 4.46E3(1) 1.992E3 1.9927E3(5)
39 2.388E3 1.262E3(3) 7.12E3 4.28E3(1) 1.709E3 1.53E3(4)
40 2.71E3 2.327E3(4) 7.29E3 5.55E3(1) 1.708E3 2.67E3(5)
41 3.352E3 1.968E3(6) 7.42E3 4.36E3(1) 2.04E3 2.19E3(6)

759
Table 2. Fuzzy ARTMAP neural network pattern recognition of system optimum topology for load factor 0.9 and 0.7 and different
levels of controller availability.

Contingency GA ARTMA GA ARTMAP GA ARTMAP GA ARTMAP GA ARTMAP GA ARTMAP

P

Load Factor=0.9 Load Factor=0.7

Max Max Normal Normal Min Min Max Max Normal Normal Min Min
1 7 7 1 1 1 7 1 1 1 1 6 6
2 5 5 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 5 5
3 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 3 3
4 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4
5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
6 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
7 3 3 1 1 3 3 4 4 1 1 1 1
8 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1
9 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4
10 4 4 4 4 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1
11 4 4 1 1 4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1
12 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
13 3 3 3 3 3 3 6 6 6 1 1 1
14 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 1 1 1 1
15 3 3 1 1 3 3 1 1 1 3 1 1
16 7 7 7 7 7 7 1 1 3 1 3 3
17 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 7 1 1 1 1
18 6 6 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1
19 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
20 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1
21 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
22 6 6 1 1 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 1
23 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
24 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
25 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
26 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4
27 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
28 2 2 1 1 1 1 - - 1 1 1 1
29 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
30 1 1 1 1 1 1 - - 1 1 1 1
31 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
32 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
33 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
34 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1
35 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1
36 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
37 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
38 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
39 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
40 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 4
41 6 6 1 1 1 6 - 1 1 1 1 1

760