Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES 2023)

IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP23AWO-ART; ISBN: 979-8-3503-9663-8

Tuning A PID Controller using

Metaheuristic Algorithms
2023 8th International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES) | 979-8-3503-9663-8/23/$31.00 ©2023 IEEE | DOI: 10.1109/ICCES57224.2023.10192687

Mini Sreejetha, Rishant Kumarb, Nishant Tripathic, Prateek Gargd

Department of Electrical Engineering
Delhi Technological University
Delhi, India

aminisreejeth@dtu.ac.in, brishantkumarimp510@gmail.com, cashutripathi12343@gmail.com

d prateek.pgarg@gmail.com

Abstract—This study describes the difficulties that
arise while fine-tuning the PID controllers. PID
controllers are used in various systems to keep things
stable but finding the right settings can be tricky,
especially for complex systems that behave in
unpredictable ways. If the controller has not been set
up correctly, it can cause the system to become
unstable and not perform as intended. Although there
are some techniques that have shown promise in the
past, they also have their limitations.
To tackle this issue, this study proposes a solution that
uses metaheuristic algorithms such as Particle Swarm
Optimization (PSO), Genetic Algorithm (GA), and Ant
Colony Optimization (ACO). These algorithms are
designed to find optimal settings for the controller
more efficiently than traditional methods. The
objective of this research is to compare how well these
new methods are compared to the traditional methods.
The results show that the new algorithms are more
effective and lead to better performance and stability
in the system. This research provides a promising
solution to the challenges of fine-tuning PID
controllers, especially for more complex systems that
are difficult to control.
Keywords— PID Controller, Optimization, Genetic
Algorithm, Ant Colony Optimization, Particle Swarm
Optimization, Rise Time, Maximum Overshoot, Settling
Time
Various methods can be found, with the ZN tuning
formula being the most well-known method. Once tuned
using the ZN method, a good system response can be
achieved, but not necessarily an optimal one.
On the other hand, Genetic Algorithm (GA) is
highly effective at finding solutions to a variety of
problems. ACO is a versatile optimization method and
PSO’s ability to work with swarms allows it to explore
multiple local minima, increasing the chances of finding
the global minima.
A. BACKGROUND
Gas turbines are commonly used in various
industries, such as refineries and chemical plants, to power
compressors. Centrifugal compressors are typically used
due to their ability to handle large volumes of data, which
translates to high energy consumption. Turbine-
compressor systems are highly reliable and play a critical
role in plant operations.
In the mentioned setup, the turbine is commonly
powered by high-pressure steam (HPS) which in turn
drives the compressor. Hydraulic governor is responsible
for regulating the flow of steam to the turbine section.
Meanwhile, the electronic governor control panel employs
a PID controller to control the opening of the governor.

I. INTRODUCTION

PID controller is a crucial type of controller that

has found widespread use in various industry segments. In
most industrial applications, PID controllers offer
excellent static and dynamic responses because of their
simplistic structure and strong performance under a broad
range of operating situations [1][2].
In the past, engineers typically used a trial-and-
error approach to handle the matter. They manually tuned
Fig 1. Schematic Diagram of turbine speed Control [10]
PID controllers, which was a time-consuming process.

979-8-3503-9663-8/23/$31.00 ©2023 IEEE 276

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - Gaziosmanpasa University. Downloaded on May 29,2024 at 17:29:22 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES 2023)
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP23AWO-ART; ISBN: 979-8-3503-9663-8

∞
As it is widely known, PID controllers are fiae = ∫0 |𝑒(𝑡)|𝑑𝑡
extensively used in various aspects of industrial
automation across different industries, including heavy Derivative action introduces a lead into the
ones like refineries and shipbuilding. However, to system in the action. This eliminates lag in the system
optimize the performance, we need to determine the caused by the Integral action earlier in the process.
optimal tuning method. Should we still rely on traditional
methods like the Ziegler-Nichols technique or move to A. CONTINUOUS PID
advanced methods? The PID controller transfer function:
II. PID CONTROLLER

P- Proportional, I- Action, and D- Action are the

three types of PID controllers also known as ZN PID tune
parameters. These controllers are the most widely used
control algorithms and will be the focus of this chapter.
Feedback loops typically use PID controllers, which come
in a variety of configurations such as standalone
controllers, part of a DDC package, that is commonly used
in plants like pharmaceutical and oil refineries.
It is noteworthy that greater than half of today’s Fig 3. Continuous PID Controller Block Diagram [14]
industrial controllers are PID controllers. The PID
controller is illustrated in the diagram below, and it can be PID utilizes a combination of three actions to
configured in a non-interacting form (NIF). regulate the variable being managed.

The P action is proportional and based on the

difference between the feedback and input signals. The
Integral action is proportional to the integral of the error
signal, while the Derivative action is proportional to the
derivative of the error signal.

Fig 2. The PID Controller – Non-Interacting Form PID controllers are widely used in industries
Schematic Diagram [13] such as manufacturing, robotics, and process control to
regulate variables such as temperature, pressure, flow, and
For proportional control,
𝑃 = 𝐾𝑝 × 𝑒(𝑡) position. They are also used in HVAC systems,
automotive control, and flight control systems.
To control the system, it makes use of the
proportion of system errors. Offset is produced into the B. DESIGNING PID
system as a result of this activity.
The PID controller transfer function is given as
In Integral control,
𝑡
𝐺𝑐 (𝑠) = 𝐾𝑝 + ( 𝐾𝑖 /𝑠) + 𝐾𝑑𝑠
𝐼 = 𝐾𝑖 × ∫ 𝑒(𝑡) 𝑑𝑡
0
The PID controller's P, I, and D gains are given
Its magnitude is proportional to the system's by Kp, Ki, and Kd, respectively. As depicted in Figure 1,
level of inaccuracy. Integral action causes a lag in the the ACO algorithm is utilized to generate the PID
system during the action. Offset produced earlier by the controller Gc(t)'s Kp, Ki, and Kd gains for a specific plant
Proportional action will be removed as a result of this. Gp.
𝑡
In Derivative control, 𝑈(𝑡) = 𝐾𝑝 × 𝑒(𝑡) + 𝐾𝑖 ∫ 𝑒(𝜏) 𝑑𝜏 + 𝐾𝑑 × 𝑑{𝑒(𝑡)}/𝑑𝑡
0
𝐷 = 𝐾𝑑 × 𝑑{𝑒(𝑡)}/𝑑𝑡

It is proportional to error rate of change. Error

between desired input and actual output at a specific time t is
represented by e(t). By adjusting the values Kp, Ki, and Kd of
the PID, various response curves can be generated from a
given plant. The challenge in designing a PID for a specific
plant is to adjust these values to achieve the desired system
performance. It is crucial to keep both the magnitude and
duration of the response under an acceptable limit since the
response of a system is important. The IAE, can be expressed
as:
III. ZIEGLER-NICHOLS METHOD
Ziegler-Nichols introduced the method that
requires the unit-step response curve to have an S-
shape; parameters like delay time (L) and time constant
(T) are obtained by analysing the unit step response of
the system, as given in the figure.

979-8-3503-9663-8/23/$31.00 ©2023 IEEE 277

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - Gaziosmanpasa University. Downloaded on May 29,2024 at 17:29:22 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES 2023)
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP23AWO-ART; ISBN: 979-8-3503-9663-8
Fig 4. Open Loop System Step Response [12]
Initially, the maximum slope of the response is
identified, and a tangent is drawn at the point. The L
parameter is obtained by determining the intersection
between the tangent and the time axis, while the intersection
between the tangent and the line y(t) = K yields T. Parameters
are then calculated using the values of a = KL / T and L, as
detailed in Table 1.
Table 1. Ziegler-Nichols Tuning Formula for Step Response
Method
A. MANUAL TRAINING METHOD (S-DOMAIN)
Table 2 gives a summary of separate impacts that
given three terms of the PID have on the performance of the
closed-loop system. It can be utilised to manually adjust the
parameters of the controller, starting from the values
acquired through ZN methods, and by understanding the
impact of the parameters on unit step response. Although the
manual tuning is simple, it necessitates some expertise and
takes some time to achieve the desired response.
Table 2. Independent P, I and D effect on the System
Response
B. THEORETICAL CALCULATION OF PID
PARAMETERS
We further elaborate on PID tuning techniques
discussed; a calculation is necessary. In order to do so, let us
consider the response of a 3rd order system with a transfer
function given by
𝟏
𝐆𝐩 (𝐬) =
(𝟑𝒔 + 𝟏)(𝟐𝒔 + 𝟏)(𝒔 + 𝟏)
To simulate the control system in the s-domain, we
will be using Simulink models as depicted in Figure 5.
979-8-3503-9663-8/23/$31.00 ©2023 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - Gaziosmanpasa University. Downloaded on May 29,2024 at 17:29:22 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig 5. Simulink Model
C. ZIEGLER-NICHOLS STEP RESPONSE
CALCULATION
In order to utilize Ziegler-Nichols’ calculation
method, the step response of the plant must be graphed, as
illustrated in the Figure. Response of the system in the figure
indicates L = 1.69 T = 8.73, and K = 1.
Fig 6. Step Response of Plant Transfer Function
IV. GENETIC ALGORITHM
Genetic Algorithm (GA) is a global search optimization
method inspired by natural selection theory. The GA is
highly effective at finding solutions to a variety of
problems.[6]
In each iteration, the algorithm evaluates the fitness of each
solution, and selects the best ones to reproduce and generate
new candidate solutions for the next iteration.
They are particularly useful for problems with a large search
space, non-linearity, and non-differentiability.
A. POPULATION SIZE
Determining the number of individuals in a
population is a crucial step in GA.
The population estimation method used in this
study was arbitrary, but based on previous research, a safe
range for population size is between 30 and 100 individuals.
However, when a sample population of 20 was used in this
experiment, the results were discouraging, prompting further
testing with populations of 40, 60, 80, and 90 individuals.
Ultimately, a population size of 80 was deemed appropriate,
with no additional optimization observed beyond a
population size of 90 or more.
B. REPRODUCTION
The reproduction step in a genetic algorithm is a
crucial process where the fittest individuals from the current
population are selected for producing the next generation of
solutions. The selection process is based on the fitness
function, which evaluates the quality of the solutions. The
goal of the reproduction step is to create a diverse population
that retains the best solutions from the current population
278
 Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES 2023)
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP23AWO-ART; ISBN: 979-8-3503-9663-8

while exploring new areas of the solution space.

C. CROSSOVER
The crossover operator simulates the genetic
recombination process in biological organisms, where the
genetic material of two parents is combined to produce
offspring with a new set of traits [8].

In the crossover process, two parent individuals are

randomly selected from the population and their genetic
material is exchanged to produce a new offspring solution.
The exchange of genetic material can happen at one or more
points along the chromosomes of the parents, and the
crossover points are randomly selected for each pair of
parents.
The result of the crossover operation is two new
offspring solutions that inherit genetic traits from both
parents. The new solutions are then evaluated by the fitness
function to determine their suitability for the next generation
of solutions.
D. MUTATION
The mutation operator introduces random changes
to the genetic material of an individual, simulating the
process of genetic mutation in biological organisms.
For example, in a binary-coded genetic algorithm,
a mutation might involve flipping a bit from 0 to 1 or from 1
to 0. In a real-coded genetic algorithm, a mutation might
involve adding a small random value to a gene value.
The mutation operator helps to maintain genetic
diversity in the population and prevents the algorithm from
getting stuck in local optima. However, the mutation rate
should be carefully chosen to balance the exploration and
exploitation of the solution space.
V. ANT COLONY OPTIMIZATION
ACO, or Ant Colony Optimization, is an
evolutionary meta-heuristic technique that utilizes graphs to
solve complex combinatorial optimization problems [5]. The
approach involves searching for the lowest cost path through
the problem graph, with the help of artificial ants. However,
since each ant has limited capabilities, it can only identify
suboptimal paths.
Fig 7. Ant Colony Optimization [11]
Artificial ants in ACO mimic real ants by leaving
pheromone trails on the edges of the graph, and choosing
their path based on probabilities that depend on the
pheromone concentration, which decreases over time. The
ants are attracted to nodes with shorter edges and higher
pheromone concentration. However, there are also some
differences between artificial ants and real ants. Artificial
ants exist in a separate universe and move between nodes,
while their actions are stored in data structures for memory.
Pheromone is usually not deposited during movement, and
the amount deposited depends on the quality of the path.
At each generation, artificial ants generate a
complete tour by probabilistically selecting nodes in a
specific order. In selecting a node, an ant considers both a
heuristic factor and a pheromone factor.[1] The heuristic
factor, represented by ηij, evaluates the desirability of placing
node j at node i in the permutation, and the pheromone factor,
represented by 𝑟𝑖𝑗, is a measure of the previous successful
solutions from other ants. The heuristic value is based on
specific problem heuristics, while the pheromone value is
based on past successful solutions.[9]
An ant selects the next node using the Pseudo-
Random-Proportional Action Choice Rule. This rule states
that the ant chooses a node j from the set S of nodes that have
not been selected yet based on a probability qo.[2] The value
of qo is a parameter of the algorithm and falls within the
range of 0 to less than 1. The ant chooses the node that
maximizes a certain criterion, although the specific criterion
is not stated.
[𝑟𝑖𝑗]𝛼[𝜂𝑖𝑗]𝛽
An ant's decision-making process for selecting the
subsequent node is influenced by the pheromone and
heuristic values, which are determined by the constants α and
β. The algorithm employs the Pseudo Random-Proportional
Action Choice Rule, and the probability parameter qo is
utilized. When qo falls within the range of 0 to less than 1,
the ant picks node j from the set S that provides the highest
product of pheromone and heuristic values. In contrast, when
qo is outside this range, the ant employs a formula to choose
the next node based on a probability distribution.

979-8-3503-9663-8/23/$31.00 ©2023 IEEE 279

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - Gaziosmanpasa University. Downloaded on May 29,2024 at 17:29:22 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES 2023)
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP23AWO-ART; ISBN: 979-8-3503-9663-8

𝛼 𝛽
[𝜏𝑖𝑗 ] [𝜂𝑖𝑗 ]
𝑃𝑖𝑗 =
∑ℎ𝜖𝑆[𝜏𝑖ℎ ]𝛼 [𝜂𝑖ℎ ]𝛽
The likelihood of transitioning between nodes is
determined by finding a balance between the heuristic and
pheromone factors. Nodes that are closer (i.e., with a lower
cost path) should be selected more frequently to implement a
greedy constructive heuristic for the heuristic factor.
Regarding the pheromone factor, if a particular edge (i, j) has
been frequently utilized, it is deemed highly desirable,
leading to an autocatalytic process. When the selection of the
next node yields a value of Pij, the previously mentioned rule
is applied, and the heuristic factor ij is calculated using the
following formula.
1 The optimization problem involves a vector
𝜂𝑖𝑗 =
𝑓(𝑋𝑗 )
In the given equation, f(X) denotes the cost
function of X. [4] The above formula prefers choosing edges
that are shorter (i.e., lower cost) and have a greater quantity
of pheromone. When the ant travels from node i to node j, it
leaves a substance on the path, defined as follows:
𝑄 fitness function or objective function, f(X), evaluates how
𝑘 𝑖𝑓 k th 𝑎𝑛𝑡 𝑢𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑒𝑑𝑔𝑒 (𝑖, 𝑗) 𝑖𝑛 𝑖𝑡𝑠 𝑡𝑜𝑢𝑟
∆𝜏𝑖𝑗 = { 𝐿𝑘
0 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑤𝑖𝑠𝑒
The amount of pheromone laid by ants is related to
the quality of the path they take, with more pheromone being
deposited on shorter paths. This value is evaluated after an
ant completes a tour, which consists of n iterations or
generations. The amount of pheromone previously deposited
on the trail is then updated based on certain guidelines. The
update is done by considering a constant Q and the cost of
the tour performed by the ant, denoted by Lk.
𝜏𝑖𝑗 (𝑡 + 𝑛) = 𝜌. 𝜏𝑖𝑗 + ∆𝜏𝑖𝑗 (𝑡)
𝑚 following function.
∆𝜏𝑖𝑗 (𝑡) = ∑ 𝜏𝑖𝑗 (𝑡)
𝑘=1
where m represents the number of ants, the coefficient (0,1)
determines how long the trail persists during a cycle, where
(1- ρ) represents the amount of trail that evaporates between
generation ηg and ηg+1.
The method for modifying pheromone levels aims
to replicate the impact of fresh pheromone deposition by ants
on the edges visited, as well as the dissipation of pheromone.
The process concludes either when an ant finds a solution or
the maximum number of iterations is attained.
VI. PARTICLE SWARM OPTIMIZATION
behaviour of flocks of birds or schools of fish, where all
members of the group can benefit from the experiences of
others.[7] Essentially, if one bird in a flock finds food, the
others can follow and benefit from this discovery.
In the context of optimization, PSO can be thought
of as a group of particles moving through a high-dimensional
solution space, each particle representing a potential
solution. The particles move towards the best solution found
so far by the group, while also exploring new areas of the
solution space. While it is unlikely that PSO will find the true
global optimal solution, it often produces results that are very
close to it.
A. OPTIMIZATION PROBLEM
variable X = [x1x2x3…xn], which is used to minimize or
maximize the cost function f(X), depending on the
optimization formulation. X is also referred to as the position
vector, representing a variable model with n dimensions
where n is the number of variables in the problem. For
instance, in the problem of a flock of birds choosing a landing
point, X can be thought of as the latitude and longitude. The
good or bad a position X is based on how well a bird can land
there. This evaluation is done using multiple survival criteria.
B. PSO ALGORITHM
The following is the step-by-step procedure for the
algorithm:
1. Generate a ‘population’ of agents (particles) that are
evenly spread out across the range of X.
2. Compute the value of the objective function for each
particle by considering its position. For instance, consider the
z = f (x, y) = sinx2 + siny2 + sinx siny
3. If a particle's current position is superior to its previous
best position, then replace it.
4. Determine the best particle based on their previous best
positions.
5. Modify the velocities of the particles.
6. Update the positions of the particles to their new locations.

Particle swarm optimization (PSO) is a bio-
inspired technique utilized for finding the best possible
solutions within a provided solution space. It differs from
other optimization algorithms since it solely depends on the
objective function and does not rely on the gradient or any
differential form of the objective.
The idea behind the algorithm is based on the
7. Continue with the steps described in 2 until the stopping
conditions are met.[3]
VII. RESULTS
In this section, we present the results of our
proposed algorithms using both numerical and graphical
representations. All computations were performed using

979-8-3503-9663-8/23/$31.00 ©2023 IEEE 280

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - Gaziosmanpasa University. Downloaded on May 29,2024 at 17:29:22 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES 2023)
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP23AWO-ART; ISBN: 979-8-3503-9663-8
MATLAB/Simulink. In order to compare the performance of
our algorithms, we also used a Genetic Algorithm, ACO and
Fig 8: Step-response of PID plant using ZN
Fig 9: Step-response of PID plant using GA
Fig 10: Step-response of PID plant using ACO
Fig 11: Step-response of PID plant using PSO
[1]
[2]
979-8-3503-9663-8/23/$31.00 ©2023 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - Gaziosmanpasa University. Downloaded on May 29,2024 at 17:29:22 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
PSO. The plant used in our experiments is:
Table 3. Comparison of different Optimization techniques
Table 3 presents the simulation outcomes of three
advanced optimization techniques and one classical method
applied to a single plant. The results are based on three
measurement criteria. It is evident that all advanced
techniques have performed better than the classical method.
The classical method performed better only in the Maximum
Overshoot column. Nevertheless, in most industrial plants, a
slight overshoot is not a major concern. The ACO controller
had a much shorter rise time than the GA and PSO
controllers, and its settling time was also shorter than that of
the GA and PSO controllers. However, the maximum
overshoot of the ACO controller was more than double that
of the GA controller. We can improve the performance by
decreasing the overshoot. Therefore, the ACO controller
performed better than the GA and PSO controllers in terms
of rise-time and settling-time parameters, but it lagged in the
maximum overshoot parameter. Settling time is low in all the
metaheuristic techniques, hence the stability is achieved.
IX. CONCLUSION
The study demonstrated the potential of current
metaheuristic methods and computational capabilities in
obtaining optimal adaptive control. It presented a new
method for creating PID controllers that would provide
desirable performance for a particular plant. The process of
creating these controllers was framed as an optimization
problem using four performance indexes, including
maximum overshoot, settling time, rise time, and integral
absolute error. To identify the most suitable solution,
optimization algorithms utilizing GA, PSO, and ACO were
created, which enabled the discovery of the optimal global
solution.
The unique aspect of the techniques introduced in
this paper is that they are easy to implement, provide greater
flexibility in problem formulation, and enable designers to
obtain a global optimum solution for designing PID
controllers. The proposed methods were evaluated on a plant
and produced promising results, which were compared to
each other as well as a classical method.
X. REFERENCES
Ying-Tung Hsiao, Cheng-Long Chuang, ChengChih
Chien. "Ant colony optimization for designing of PID
controllers", 2004 IEEE International Conference on
Robotics and Automation ;(IEEE Cat. No.04CH37508),
2004
Gustavo Maia de Almeida, Marco Antonio de S. L.
Cuadro, Rogerio Passos P. Amaral, Jose Leandro Felix
281
 Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Communication and Electronics Systems (ICCES 2023)
IEEE Xplore Part Number: CFP23AWO-ART; ISBN: 979-8-3503-9663-8
Salles. "Optimal tuning parameters of the dynamic matrix [8]
predictive controller with ant colony optimization", 2014
11th IEEE/IAS International Conference on Industry
Applications, 2014 [9]
[3] Houssam Nahilia, Mohamed Boudour. "Distribution
power loss minimization using Particle Swarm
Optimization and genetic algorithms: Application on
Algerian isolated grid", 2016 International Conference on [10]
Control, Decision and Information Technologies
(CoDIT), 2016
[4] Ying-Tung Hsiao, Cheng-Long Chuang, ChengChih
Chien. "Ant colony optimization for best path planning”, [11]
IEEE International Symposium on Communications and
Information Technology, 2004. ISCIT 2004., 2004
[5] Seckiner, S.U. "Ant colony optimization for the job
rotation scheduling problem”, Applied Mathematics and
Computation, 20080715 [12]
[6] D.S. Pereira, J.O.P. Pinto. "Genetic algorithm based
system identification and PID tuning for optimum
adaptive control”, Proceedings, 2005 IEEE/ASME
International Conference on Advanced Intelligent
Mechatronics., 2005 [13]
[7] “Proceedings of the International Conference on Soft
Computing for Problem Solving (SocProS 2011)
December 20-22, 2011”, Springer Science and Business
Media LLC, 2012 [14]
979-8-3503-9663-8/23/$31.00 ©2023 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - Gaziosmanpasa University. Downloaded on May 29,2024 at 17:29:22 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Altinten, A.. "Generalized predictive control applied to a
pH neutralization process”, Computers and Chemical
Engineering, 200710
Cheng-Chih Chien. "Ant colony optimization for
designing of PID controllers”, 2004 IEEE International
Conference on Robotics and Automation (IEEE Cat No
04CH37508) CACSD04, 2004
M. V. Subramanyam, K. S. Prasad, and P. G. K. Rao,
“Robust Control of Steam Turbine System Speed using
Improved IMC Tuned PID Controller,” Procedia
Engineering, vol. 38, pp. 1450-1456, 2012.
Datta, A & Nandakumar, Soundharyaa. (2017). A survey
on bio inspired meta heuristic-based clustering protocols
for wireless sensor networks. IOP Conference Series:
Materials Science and Engineering. 263. 052026.
10.1088/1757-899X/263/5/052026.
Dinakin, Demilade & Oluseyi, Peter. (2019).
Comparative study of meta-heuristic and classical
techniques for automatic generation control of a multi-
source single-area hydro-thermal-gas power system. 10.
151-172. 10.30572/2018/kje/100310.
Bharadwaj, C. & Thanikanti, Sudhakar Babu &
Natarajan, Rajasekar. (2018). Tuning PID Controller for
Inverted Pendulum Using Genetic Algorithm.
10.1007/978-981-10-4762-6_38.
Bansal, Hari. (2009). Tuning of PID Controllers using
Simulink. International Journal of Mathematical
Modeling, Simulation and Applications.
282