Electrical Power and Energy Systems 124 (2021) 106314

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Electrical Power and Energy Systems

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijepes

A multiagent system based optimal load restoration strategy in distribution T

systems
Lun Yanga, Yinliang Xua, , Hongbin Sunb, Moyuen Chowc, Jianguo Zhoua
⁎

a
Tsinghua-Berkeley Shenzhen Institute (TBSI), Tsinghua Shenzhen International Graduate School, Tsinghua University, Shenzhen, China
b
Department of Electrical Engineering, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
c
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, North Carolina State University, NC, USA

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Natural disasters pose a significant impact on the distribution infrastructures and often cause severe power
Distributed energy resources outage including critical services. This paper proposes a new restoration approach to restore critical loads using
Load restoration distributed energy resources (DERs). Specifically, the critical load restoration problem, considering both the
Distributed algorithm availability of DERs and the optimal restoration path, is formulated as a variation of the shortest path problem.
Reliability
The objective aims at maximizing the reliability of the restoration plan to decrease the possibility of post-
Shortest path problem
restoration failures. A distributed approach framework embedded min/max-consensus, and bias min-consensus
algorithms is developed, which only requires information exchange among neighbors based on a peer-to-peer
communication protocol. The proposed distributed restoration approach is adaptive to topology changes and
robust to unreliable communication network. Numerical results with various scenarios demonstrate the effec-
tiveness of the proposed distributed restoration approach.

1. Introduction
Natural disasters, such as hurricanes, and blizzards, significantly
affect the power infrastructures, leading to the severe power outage and
great economic loss [1]. The extreme weather events have caused
roughly 679 power outages since 2003, each event affects at least 50
000 customers, and the resulting economic loss is over $20 billion an-
nually [2]. Although the pre-disaster defense in distribution systems has
been developed in recent years [3], distribution systems are still quite
vulnerable when exposed to natural disasters. Therefore, researchers
focus on solutions of restoring critical loads (CLs) quickly and reliably
after a disaster to reduce the economic loss and enhance the resilience
of distribution systems [4]. Critical loads usually contain hospitals,
water stations, traffic lights, and other infrastructures related to the
basic needs of human life.
The traditional distribution system restoration that aims to restore
loads by changing the topological structure after a fault has been widely
studied in the literature with various solution methods, such as expert
system [5], fuzzy logic [6], and mixed-integer linear programming [7].
These methods can effectively restore loads and isolate the fault.
Nevertheless, when the distribution system suffers from the severe
natural disaster and the substations may be damaged, the main grids
cannot supply the power to the distribution system. In such situation,
the traditional distribution system restoration methods may be not
applicable [8].
Utilizing distributed energy resources (DERs) such as renewable
based distributed generations and energy storages as the utility power is
an alternative approach to continue power supply for CLs in the case
without power feeding from the main grids [9]. The focus of this paper
is to study the CL restoration using DERs for the distribution system
after a natural disaster. Many works in literatures use DERs and mi-
crogrids for restoring CLs to improve the distribution system resilience
[10–19]. Li et al. [10] presented a spanning tree search based restora-
tion method to maximize the restored loads and minimize the number
of switching operations. Wang et al. [11] proposed a restoration method
based on self-supplied microgrids to maximize the restored loads.
Considering the availability of microgrids, Gao et al. [12] proposed a
resilience-oriented restoration approach using microgrids to restore
CLs. Xu et al. [13] presented a mixed integer linear programming-based
restoration method considering the dynamic performance of DERs. Zhu
et al. [14] proposed a microgrid formation model for the load restora-
tion of a distribution system. Wang et al. [15] considered multiple

Abbreviations: CL, Critical load; DBMC, Distributed Bias Min-Consensus; DCLR, Distributed Critical Load Restoration; DER, Distributed Energy Resource; MAS,
Multiagent System; MPS, Mobile Power Source; SPP, Shortest Path Problem
⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: xu.yinliang@sz.tsinghua.edu.cn (Y. Xu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2020.106314
Received 28 February 2020; Received in revised form 16 May 2020; Accepted 18 June 2020
0142-0615/ © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L. Yang, et al.
sources including microgrids and DERs, and then proposed a restoration
method by coordinating the multiple sources. In addition, mobile power
sources (MPSs), such as electric vehicle fleets, truck-mounted mobile
energy storage systems and mobile emergency generators, are as a
special class of promising DERs for improving the resilience of dis-
tributions systems [16–18]. Reference [16] studied the pre-positioning
and real-time allocation of mobile emergency generators. Reference
[17] studied the routing and scheduling of MPSs. In [18], the co-opti-
mization dispatch of MPSs and repair crew was further explored. The
limitations of the aforementioned restoration methods are twofold: 1)
most of the traditional CL restoration methods are centralized optimi-
zation, which may impose heavy communications burden for the dis-
tribution system restoration after a disaster. In this sense, the cen-
tralized optimization-based restoration methods may not be suitable to
address the dynamic features of topology changes and communication
interruptions during and after a disaster. and 2) these restoration
methods do not consider the impact of post-restoration failure after the
restoration plan has been executed. Dubey and Poudel [19] pointed out
that the distribution feeders are more probably to fail in the aftermath
of a natural disaster and proposed a resilient restoration approach using
DERs considering post-restoration failures.
To enhance the resilience of communications in the restoration
process, some researches introduced the distributed control-based
method in the restoration process. Sharma et al. [20] proposed a mul-
tiagent coordination approach for load restoration using DERs and
further investigated the impacts of vehicle-to-grid facility on load re-
storation. Xu et al. [21] proposed a distributed average-consensus al-
gorithm-based load restoration method. Chen et al. [8] proposed a MAS-
based load restoration method by dynamically forming microgrids and
employed the average-consensus algorithm for global information dis-
covery in the restoration process. Although the average-consensus al-
gorithm based global information discovery of [21] and [8] is im-
plemented in a distributed manner, the convergence is very slow.
Moreover, the optimal restoration decision-making in [21] and [8] is
still centralized in nature, which poses heavy computation burden to
the controllers. Besides distributed control-based method, decentralized
control-based method is also a common method in power system ana-
lysis. In decentralized control framework, local agent controls itself and
there is no communication among agents [22]. However, for the critical
load restoration problem after a natural disaster, discovering the re-
storation path from power source to critical load requires global in-
formation discovery and thus needs the communications among agents.
Therefore, the decentralized control-based methods have not been ap-
plied in the critical load restoration problem after a disaster so far.
While agents in distributed control framework communicating with
neighbor agents can realize the information exchange required in the
restoration process.
To address the above issues, a distributed CL restoration (DCLR)
approach using DERs, which considers the availability of DERs and the
optimal restoration paths during a disaster and the aftermath, is pro-
posed in this paper. In the proposed DCLR approach, a reliability index
is defined first to characterize the impact of post-restoration failures in
the restoration plan. The CL restoration problem is then formulated as a
variant of the shortest path problem (SPP), and the goal is to maximize
the reliability of the restoration plan thereby decreasing the possibility
to post- restoration failures. However, SPP is a very complicated pro-
blem and has been validated to be non-deterministic polynomial-time
hard [23]. Zhang et al. [24] proposed a novel distributed biased min-
consensus algorithm that enables solving the SPP, while the method
mainly investigates the SPP with the minimum summation of distance
in each branch. However, many engineering problems, such as the re-
storation path with minimum probability of failures, and the minimum
information loss path, are more appropriate to be described as an SPP
variation with the minimum product of probability or ratio on each
branch. Inspired by the work of [24], the modeled SPP variation is
converted as a conventional SPP with the minimum summation of
2
Electrical Power and Energy Systems 124 (2021) 106314
branches’ unreliability indices, the distributed biased min-consensus
algorithm is then for the first time extended to address the formulated
SPP based CL restoration problem. Furthermore, a DCLR approach
framework including min-consensus, max-consensus, and bias min-
consensus algorithms is developed to discover an optimal CL restoration
solution with a maximum reliability index. Numerical results validate
the effectiveness of the proposed DCLR approach.
The main contributions of this paper are summarized as follows:
1. Different from most of the existing CL restoration studies [10–18]
that do not consider the impact of post-restoration failure, this paper
includes the possibility of post-restoration failures in the aftermath
of a disaster and proposes a SPP-based CL restoration model to
maximize the reliability of restoration plan.
2. A DCLR approach framework embedded min-consensus, max-con-
sensus, and bias min-consensus algorithms is proposed to achieve
the optimal CL restoration solution with a maximum reliability.
Compared to the centralized optimization-based restoration ap-
proach, the proposed DCLR approach is more adaptive to the dy-
namic features of communications during and after a disaster.
3. The proposed DCLR approach converges much faster compared to
the average-consensus algorithm. More importantly, it is robust to
the line congestion, topology changes and unreliable communica-
tion conditions.
The reminder of this paper is organized as follows. Section II for-
mulates the CL restoration problem. Section III introduces the proposed
DCLR approach and its implementation. Numerical results are pre-
sented in Section IV to investigate the performance of the proposed
DCLR approach, and conclusions are drawn in Section V.
2. Critical load restoration problem formulation
In this section, the assumptions and simplifications used for mod-
eling are specified first. Then, the restoration path reliability, DER
availability, and reliability index of the restoration plan are introduced.
Finally, the CL restoration problem is formulated.
A. Assumptions and Simplifications
Some assumptions and simplifications made in this paper are ex-
plained as follows:
(1) With the advancement of automatic technology in distribution
systems, the remote-controlled switches are being applied on dis-
tribution feeders [25,26]. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that
the distribution systems have been equipped with enough remote-
controlled switches, which can be operated to control the topology
of the distribution system.
(2) The critical loads are predefined by distribution system operation
manager according to their functions. The CLs have higher priority
than the non-critical loads to be restored. Prior to the CL restora-
tion, the non-critical loads are disconnected from the power grid.
(3) The switches installed in distribution systems have local commu-
nication capabilities to exchange information (e.g., nodal power
demand, power line availability, etc.) with their neighboring
switches. This can be achieved by the matured wireless networks
like Wi-Fi or ZigBee [8]. The cost/benefit ratio of equipping these
commutation facilities in a distribution system is an interesting
evaluation problem but not the focus of this paper.
(4) The availability of the power lines and DERs depends on multiple
factors, such as the configuration, materials, etc. [27]. Accurately
estimating the availability of the power lines and DERs after a
disaster is challenging and important work, which is not the focus
of this paper. For simplification, the availability of the power lines
and DERs is calculated by their failure and repair rates similar to
L. Yang, et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 124 (2021) 106314

[19,28]. µ DER,m
ADER,m = ,m DER
(5) The forecasted outputs are used to model the renewable based DER,m + µ DER,m (3)
DERs. Uncertainty is not the main focus of this paper but is worth
being incorporated in the future research. In addition, the location where ADER,m is the availability of DER m; λDER,m and μDER,m are the
and size of DERs are predefined in the test systems. Optimizing the failure and repair rates of DER m.
location and size of DERs in a distribution system is usually for- As for how a natural disaster influences specifically the availability
mulated as a distribution system planning problem, which is be- indices of power line and DER, this may vary from the type of disaster
yond the scope of the CL restoration problem. and also are related to the configuration, materials of power lines and
DERs [27]. The influence on availability indices can be estimated in
practice by operators according to the historical data or operating ex-
3. Critical load restoration formulation
periences given the specific setup on the distribution system.

This work plans to optimize the reliability of CL restoration plan

(3) Restoration Plan Reliability
considering restoration path reliability and DER availability after a
disaster. The indices of restoration path reliability, DER availability,
The restoration plan reliability index RPLAN is used to assess the
and restoration plan reliability are defined and explained respectively
reliability of the restoration plan, which is defined as the product of the
as follows.
restoration path reliability and DER availability:

(1) Restoration Path Reliability mn

RPLAN, mn
d = ADER,m RPATH, d
= ADER,m pLINE, ij , m DER , n CL , d Dmn
Power lines of the distribution network after a disaster will be af- mn
ij NPATH, d (4)
fected to different degrees. An availability index is introduced here to
characterize the probability of success for power lines after a disaster where mn
RPLAN, d is the reliability index of the dth restoration plan from
[19]: DER m to CL n.
For the 5-node distribution system shown in Fig. 1, the restoration
µ LINE,ij plans for critical load at node 4 are DER1 → 1 → 2 → 4 and DER2 →
pLINE,ij =
LINE,ij + µ LINE,ij (1) 5 → 3 → 2 → 4. The corresponding restoration plan reliability indices
are ADER,1 pLINE,12 pLINE,24 and ADER,2 pLINE,53 pLINE,32 pLINE,24 .
where pLINE,ij is the probability of power line i-j being in service; λLINE,ij Obviously, a large RPLAN indicates a more reliable restoration plan.
and μLINE,ij are the failure and repair rates of power line i-j. Therefore, this paper aims to discover the optimal restoration plan with
Considering the availability of power lines, the restoration path a maximum reliability for supplying power to CLs.
reliability index used to evaluate the reliability of path from the source
node (DER) to load node is defined as the product of availability of each
4. Distributed approach for critical load restoration
required power line in the restoration path.
mn
RPATH, Discovering the optimal restoration plan with a maximum reliability
d = pLINE, ij , m DER , n CL , d Dmn
mn
ij NPATH, d (2) for supplying power to CLs is a very complex decision-making process.
Herein, a distributed approach framework including min-consensus
where Dmn is the set of restoration paths from DER m to CL n; DER and algorithm, max-consensus algorithm, and bias min-consensus algorithm
CL are the sets of DERs and CLs; RPATH, d is the reliability index of the
mn
is proposed to solve the problem. In this section, the min/max-con-
dth restoration path from DER m to CL n; NPATH, mn
d is the set of power sensus algorithm and bias min-consensus algorithm are briefly in-
lines used in the dth restoration path from DER m to CL n. troduced first. Then, the proposed distributed approach-based CL re-
Taking a 5-node distribution system shown in Fig. 1 as an example, storation method and its implementation are presented.
there are two restoration paths from source nodes connected DER (node
1, node 5) to load nodes (node 4), which are 1 → 2 → 4 and 5 → 3 → A. Graph theory
2 → 4. The corresponding restoration path reliability indices are
pLINE,12 pLINE,24 and pLINE,53 pLINE,32 pLINE,24 , respectively. Let G = (V , E ) be a graph with the set of nodes V = (v1, v2, , vn ) and
the set of edges E V × V . Each node corresponds to an agent. The
(2) DER Availability edge connecting node i and node j is denoted as (vi, vj ) with
i = 1, 2, n and j = 1, 2, , n , where n is the number of nodes in
After a disaster, DERs are assumed to be disconnected from the graph G . Node i and node j are adjacent and exchange information each
distribution system and will be also affected to various degrees. The other if (vi, vj ) E . The set of neighbors of node i is described by
availability of DER m is defined as [27] Ni = {vj |(vi, vj ) E } . The weight of edge (vi, vj ) is denoted by wij .
The graph is undirected if (vi, vj ) E implies (vj, vi ) E . In this
Source paper, the graph considered is undirected, which indicates that the
1
Line 1-2 communications among nodes are all bidirectional. An undirected
DER1 graph is connected if there exists a path between any pair of distinct
p Line 2-4
4 nodes.
LINE,12
p LINE,24

2
Critical load B. Min/Max-Consensus Algorithm
Line 3-2 p LINE,32 Source
5 Consider a network with n nodes defined in an undirected con-
Line 5-3 nected graph, the min/max-consensus algorithm can be applied in the
p DER2 MAS framework to find the minimum/maximum value in a distributed
LINE,53

manner.
3
The protocol of the distributed min-consensus is given as [29]:
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of the restoration path and restoration plan in a 5-
x i (k + 1) = min{x j (k )}
node distribution system. j Ni (5)

3
L. Yang, et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 124 (2021) 106314

where xi(k) is the state value of node i at kth iteration; Ni is a set of URDER, and URLINE are defined here to quantify the unreliability indices
nodes connected to i. of restoration plan, DERs, and lines. Eq. (11) can be then converted as
The state variables of all nodes under the protocol of (5) will con- mn
URPLAN, d = URDER,m + URLINE, ij
verge to (6).The convergence proof of distributed min-consensus algo- mn
ij NPATH, (13)
rithm can be found in [30]. d

X = min{x1 (0), , xi (0), , x n (0)}·1 (6) where mn

URPLAN,
= d
mn
ln RPLAN, d,
URDER,m = ln ADER,m , U
RLINE, ij = ln pLINE, ij
where X = [x1 , , x i , , xn ]T ; 1 = [1, , 1, , 1]T . Based on the objective function transformation, the CL restoration
The distributed max-consensus algorithm is similar to distributed problem with the maximum product of equipment availability is
min-consensus algorithm. The protocol of the distributed max-con- transformed into the CL restoration problem with the minimum sum-
sensus algorithms is given as [29]: mation of equipment unreliability indices, which is an SPP in nature. A
DBMC based CL restoration method is developed to discover the op-
x i (k + 1) = max{x j (k )}
j Ni (7) timal restoration plan by using the following protocol:
The state variables of all nodes under the protocol of (7) will con- x i (k + 1) = x i (0), i CL
verge to (8).The convergence proof of distributed max-consensus al- x i (k + 1) = min{xj (k ) + URLINE, ij}, i DER
gorithm can be found in [30]. j Ni (14)

X = max{x1 (0), , x i (0), , xn (0)}· 1 (8) Note that xi is the state value that represents the unreliability index
from supplier node of DER to node i. xi is dynamic until it converges to
C. Bias Min-Consensus Algorithm x* of (15) at the steady state. The convergence proof of the proposed
DBMC based CL restoration method is provided in Appendix.
The set of nodes Ω in a network can be categorized into two types of x i = x i (0), i CL
nodes: leader nodes set Ω1 and follower nodes set Ω2. The leader nodes’ x i = min{x j + URLINE, ij}, i DER .
state values are not affected by other nodes, while the follower nodes’ j Ni (15)
state values are affected by other nodes and will be updated. The dis-
tributed bias min-consensus (DBMC) algorithm proposed in [24] is able E. DCLR Approach Implementation
to address the SPP under the MAS framework, and the protocol of the
algorithm is designed as follows: The proposed DCLR approach is implemented on a MAS framework
composed of a group of interacting agents. In the developed distributed
x i (k + 1) = xi (0), i 1
MAS architecture, agents are categorized into three types: DER agent,
x i (k + 1) = min{xj (k ) + wij}, i
j Ni
2
(9) CL agent, and node agent according to their responsibility and function
in the restoration process. The DER agent and CL agent represent the
where wij is a bias value denoting the length between node i and node j. node connected to DER and CL, respectively, while the node agent re-
The state values of nodes in (9) will finally converge to (10) at the presents the node without DER and CL. In addition, each agent can
steady state. control all line switches connecting the node to its neighboring nodes,
xi = x i (0), i and agents can communicate using the peer-to-peer protocol.
1
Considering that the available DERs are usually limited after a
x i = min{x j + wij}, i 2
j Ni (10) natural disaster and the critical loads generally have different priorities
[8], CLs will be restored in sequence by the proposed DCLR approach
Note that state value of node i, xi, in the above min/max-consensus according to the load priorities. The detailed implementation procedure
algorithm and bias min-consensus algorithm does not have specific of the proposed DCLR approach based on MAS architecture is illustrated
physical meaning before being applied to a practical issue. in Fig. 2 using a five-node distribution system as an example.

D. Proposed Distributed Critical Load Restoration Method
The CL restoration problem in Section II.B is an optimal restoration
path discovery process problem with the maximum product of equip-
ment (DER and lines) availability. This kind of issue is an SPP-like
problem. The authors of [24] proposed a bias min-consensus algorithm
that can discover the SPP with the minimum summation of distance in
each edge. Inspired by this, the bias min-consensus algorithm is here
Step 1 (Initialization): All the agents initialize their state to zero
before the restoration process.
Step 2 (Broadcast the restoration request): The CL agent with higher
priority CL1 (e.g., hospital) broadcasts the power demand request
for restoration by implementing the distributed max-consensus
NODE

extended to solve the CL restoration problem with the maximum pro- 2

duct of equipment availability. Energize CL
Request
Energize
Taking logarithm on both sides of (4) with the base of 1/e (e is the
4
natural constant), (4) is transformed into (11). CL1
3
mn 1 5
ln RPLAN, d = ( ln ADER,m ) + ( ln pLINE, ij ) Selection DER
Response CL2
mn
ij NPATH, d (11) Response DER CL
Selection
Since the base 1/e < 1 (e = 2.718…), ln RPLAN, mn
d is a mono-
tonically decreasing function. The transformation of the objective DER CL NODE
DER Critical load DER agent CL agent Node agent
function (4) is shown as follows:
CL Agent broadcast power request for restoration
mn mn
Maximize(RPLAN, d) Minimize( ln(RPLAN, d )) (12) DERs response the request
Select the global minimum unreliability restoration plan
It is worth noting that RPLAN,
mn
d is to quantify the restoration plan Energize the restoration path
reliability. ln RPLAN,
mn
d can be thus regarded as a metric for measuring
the unreliability of the restoration plan. The new metrics URPLAN, Fig. 2. Restoration communication process in an example distribution system.

4
L. Yang, et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 124 (2021) 106314

algorithm. Step 7 (Energize the optimal restoration path): According to the ob-
Step 3 (Check DER and line capacities): After receiving the power tained optimal restoration path, the corresponding agents control
demand request, DER agents will check the available power the line switches to energize the path.
amounts of DERs, and the DER agents with enough power will re-
spond to the request. At the same time, each agent checks its con- According to the critical load priorities, the other CLs will be re-
nected line capacity and will set the unreliability index of the con- stored in sequence by the proposed DCLR approach, and the whole
gested line to infinity to prevent the power line congestion. flowchart for restoring NCL CLs by the proposed DCLR approach is
Step 4 (Calculate the restoration unreliability indices): The responded outlined in Fig. 3.
DER agents activate the DBMC algorithm to discover the minimum
Remark:. The salient features of the proposed DCLR approach are
unreliability indices of restoration plans from available DERs to CL1.
highlighted as: 1) the proposed DCLR approach is robust to the topology
Step 5 (Determine the DER for restoration): Based on the obtained
changes and communication delay since only the local and neighboring
minimum unreliability indices of restoration plans from available
information is required to update the local state, and 2) the proposed DCLR
DERs to CL1, the distributed min-consensus algorithm is activated to
approach is a discrete consensus-based approach, which can avoid truncated
find the DER with the global minimum unreliability index (Assume
error and immune to communication package loss compared with the
that DER1 is selected).
average-consensus algorithm.
Step 6 (Determine optimal restoration plan): By recursively discovering
the parent nodes (defined in (16)) with minimum unreliability in-
dices, the optimal restoration path is obtained (i.e., 1 → 2 → 4).
5. Case studies
,i CL
Pi =
agrminj { x ( k ) + UR ij}, i (16)
i j LINE, DER
In this section, several cases studies with the IEEE 13-node and 123-
where denotes the empty set. node distribution systems are presented to demonstrate the effective-
ness of the proposed DCLR approach.

Start

Initialize the state of all agents to be zero

The restoration process prepares to restore the critical

load with priority ranking 1st(r=1)

CL agent with the rth priority ranking broadcasts the

demand request for restoration by applying
distributed max-consensus algorithm (7)

DER agents check the available Each agent checks its connected
power amounts of DERs, and DER line capacity and set the
agents with enough power will unreliability of congested line to
respond the request infinity to prevent the congestion

The distributed bias min-consensus algorithm (14)

is activated to discover the minimum unreliability
indices from available DERs to CL
Yes
The distributed min-consensus algorithm (5) is No
activated to discover the global minimum unreliability
index of restoration plan
r<=NCL?

The optimal restoration path is obtained by recursively Update the priority

discovering the parent nodes ranking: r = r +1

The corresponding agents control the line switches to Update the state of local
energize the optimal restoration path agents

End

Fig. 3. The flowchart of the proposed DCLR approach framework.

5
L. Yang, et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 124 (2021) 106314

Critical load demand/kW

DER1 50
2 3 5 6 40
30 DER1
4 DER2
20
DER3
CL3 10
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 10 9 8 7 Iterations
Fig. 5. The broadcast process of demand information of CL1.
DER3
CL1
receiving the information, DER agents with enough power of DERs will
12 respond, and the distributed bias min-consensus algorithm is activated
13 to discover the optimal restoration plan from the available DERs to CL1.
CL2 DER2 As shown in Fig. 6, the updating profiles of minimum unreliability in-
dices from DERs to CL1 converge within 10 iterations. Then, the dis-
DER Critical load Switch tributed min-consensus algorithm is applied to find the DER with the
Fig. 4. The topology of the IEEE 13-node distribution system. minimum unreliability index among all the responded DERs. Prior to
the implementation, DER agents with responded DERs initialize their
local state with the corresponding minimum unreliability indices ob-
A. IEEE 13-node distribution system
tained in the previous stage, other agents set their state to infinity. As
shown in Fig. 7, the discovery process of global minimum unreliability
This subsection is to investigate the performance of the proposed
indices converges within 5 iterations, and DER3 is chosen to restore the
DCLR approach under the scenarios of ideal situation, line congestion,
CL1 and the unreliability index of the corresponding restoration plan is
topology changing, unreliable communication network, and heavy
0.1763. By recursively finding the parent nodes, the optimal restoration
critical load on the modified IEEE 13-node distribution system. The test
path is 7 → 8 → 9 → 10 → 11.
system illustrated in Fig. 4 consists of three DERs and three CLs. The
After restoring CL1, similarly, CL2 agent broadcasts the demand
availability parameters of power lines and DERs are listed in Tables 1
information of 30 kW to DER agents. DER1, DER2, and DER3 still have
and 2.
the power amounts of 50 kW, 60 kW, and 30 kW so that their agents
will respond. As shown in Fig. 8, the updating profiles of minimum
1%1 Ideal situation on the IEEE 13-node distribution system
unreliability indices from the DERs to CL2 converge fast within 10
iterations. By employing distributed min-consensus algorithm, DER3 is
Assume that the power demands of CL1, CL2, and CL3 to be restored
finally chosen to restore CL2, and the corresponding restoration path is
are 50 kW, 30 kW, and 20 kW, and the available power generation
7 → 8 → 9 → 10 → 12.
amounts of DER1, DER2, and DER3 are 50 kW, 60 kW, and 80 kW. The
Herein, DER3 is used to supply both CL1 and CL2. The situation may
subscripts of CLs in Fig. 4 represent the priorities (i.e., the sequence of
not occur in the normal operation condition. While the distribution
restoration).
system after a natural disaster is special situation that critical loads
According to the restoration priority, CL1 needs to be restored first.
need to be quickly restored, and the available DERs are usually limited
CL1 agent broadcasts the demand information of 50 kW to all agents by
in practice. Therefore, it is possible to use one power source to supply
using the distributed max-consensus protocol. Fig. 5 shows that all DER
agents receive the information quickly within 5 iterations. After
0.25
Unreliability indices

Table 1 0.20
Parameters of Lines in the IEEE 13-node Distribution System.
X= 10
0.15 Y= 0.1763
Line Capacity/kW Availability pLINE -ln(pLINE)
0.10 DER1
L1,4 100 0.97 0.0305
L2,3 100 0.96 0.0408 0.05 DER2
L3,4 100 0.99 0.0101 DER3
L4,5 150 0.96 0.0408 0
L4,9 200 0.98 0.0202 0 10 20 30 40 50
L5,6 150 0.95 0.0513 Iterations
L7,8 80 0.99 0.0101
L8,9 80 0.99 0.0101 Fig. 6. Updating profiles of unreliability indices from the DERs to CL1.
L9,10 120 0.97 0.0305
L9,13 120 0.96 0.0408
0.22
L10,11 120 0.98 0.0202
DER1
Unreliability indices

L10,12 120 0.98 0.0202

DER2
0.20 DER3

Table 2
0.18
Parameters of DERs in the IEEE 13-node Distribution System.
DER Node Type Availability ADER -ln(ADER)
0.16
DER1 1 Renewable 0.91 0.0943 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
DER2 13 Renewable 0.88 0.1278 Iterations
DER3 7 Storage 0.90 0.1054
Fig. 7. Discovery process of the global minimum unreliability indices.

6
L. Yang, et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 124 (2021) 106314

0.25 DER1 1

Unreliability indices
0.20 2 3 5 6
0.15 X= 10
Y= 0.1763
4
0.10 DER1
DER2 CL3
0.05
DER3
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 11 10 9
Iterations
Fig. 8. Updating profiles of unreliability indices from the DERs to CL2. CL1

0.25 12
13
Unreliability indices

0.20 CL2 DER2

0.15 DER Critical load Switch

0.10 Fig. 11. The changed topology of the IEEE 13-node distribution system.
DER1
0.05
DER2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Iterations 0.20

Unreliability indices
X= 10
Fig. 9. Updating profiles of unreliability indices from the DERs to CL3. 0.15 Y= 0.1957

multiple loads under such situation. Note that this situation does not
last a long time until the main grid can normally supply power to loads.
After restoring CL1 and CL2, it is turn to restore CL3. CL3 agent
broadcasts the demand information of 20 kW to all the agents. At this
moment, the remaining power amounts of DER1, DER2, and DER3 are
50 kW, 60 kW, and 0 kW. Therefore, only DER1 agent and DER2 agent
will respond. As shown in Fig. 9, the updating profiles of unreliability
indices from the DER1 and DER2 to CL3 converge. DER1 is selected for
restoring CL3 by using distributed min-consensus algorithm and the
restoration path is 1 → 4 → 3 → 2.
2%1 Line congestion situation
This case is to analyze the effects of line congestion on optimal re-
storation plan. Assume that CL1 to be restored is 85 kW, and the
available amounts of DER1, DER2, and DER3 are 100 kW, 85 kW, and
90 kW. The power load of 85 kW exceeds the transmission capacities
(80 kW) of L7,8 and L8,9. The agents connected to L7,8 and L8,9 will set
their unreliability indices to infinity to avoid congestion. As shown in
Fig. 10, the unreliability index of restoration plan using DER3 is infinity
since its restoration path includes the congested lines L7,8 and L8,9. The
updating profiles of unreliability indices from DER1 and DER2 to CL1
converge. Apparently, the restoration plan using DER1 has the lowest
unreliability index of 0.1957. Therefore, the DER1 is selected to restore
CL1 under such line congestion situation, and the corresponding re-
storation path is 1 → 4 → 9 → 10 → 11.
3%1 Topology changing situation
0.15
DER1
0.05
DER2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Iterations
Fig. 12. Updating profiles of unreliability indices in the time-varying topology.
This case is to discuss the effect of topology changes on the discover
process of optimal restoration plan. Assume that CL1 is 50 kW, and the
available amounts of DER1, DER2, and DER3 are 50 kW, 60 kW, and
80 kW. The condition is the same as Section 4.A.1. Since the power
demand of 50 kW does not exceed the transmission capacities of lines,
there is no congestion. Consider that the topological structure of the
distribution system may be dynamic changing during the aftermath of
the disaster, assume line L8,9 fails during implementing the restoration
plan discovery process. Here, “fail” means that the line is at the status of
unconnected. The information of topology change can be shared in
distributed manner based on the MAS framework. The proposed DCLR
approach will be re-implemented according to the updated topology
information. The changed topology is illustrated in Fig. 11.
Fig. 12 shows the updating profiles of unreliability indices during
the time-varying topologies. As shown in Fig. 12, the updating profiles
of unreliability indices from DERs to CL1 under the topology changing
situation converge successfully. The available restoration paths are
from DER1 and DER2 to restore CL1, and the optimal restoration plan is
to use DER1 for restoring CL1 with the minimum unreliability index of
0.1957. Note that there is no available restoration path from DER3 to
CL1 since line L8,9 fails. These results verify that the proposed DCLR
approach is adaptive to the topology changing situation.

4%1 Unreliable communication network situation

Unreliability indices

0.20
X= 10 This case is to investigate the effect of unreliable communication
0.15 Y= 0.1957
caused by the disaster on the discover process of optimal restoration
0.15 plan. Here, the unreliable communication is described using commu-
DER1
nication failure in communication channels. The status of commu-
0.05 DER2
DER3 nication channels between node i and node j at kth iteration is modeled
0 by Pr{C: i j = 0} = p (communication between nodes i and j fails),
0 10 20 30 40 50
and Pr{C: i j=1} = 1 p (communication between nodes i and j suc-
Iterations
ceeds), where “0″ and “1” represent the status of failure and success,
Fig. 10. Updating profiles of unreliability indices from the DERs to CL1 after p (0, 1) is a ratio used to describe the degree of unreliable commu-
the topology change. nication caused by disaster. The test condition of the distribution

7
L. Yang, et al.
0.25
Unreliability indices
0.20
0.15 X= 14
Y= 0.1763
0.10
0.05
0 0.05
0 10 20 30 40
Iterations
Fig. 13. Updating profiles of unreliability indices from DERs to CL1 under 20%
communication failure probability.
60
50
Iterations
40
30
20
10
20% 40% 60%
Communication failure probabilities
Fig. 14. Required iterations under different communication failure prob-
abilities.
system is the same as Section 4.A.1. Assume that communication
channels C4-5 (between node 4 and node 5), C8-9, and C10-11 are un-
reliable. When the communication channel fails, its connected agents
use the latest information in the previous iteration. As shown in Fig. 13,
the updating profiles of unreliability indices from DERs to CL1 under
20% communication failure probability (i.e., p = 20%) converge suc-
cessfully. The obtained optimal restoration plan, which uses DER3 for
restoring CL1 with the minimum unreliability index of 0.1763, is the
same as that of Section 4.A.1. Different communication failure prob-
abilities (20%, 40%, 60%, and 80%) are further analyzed. For each
communication failure probability, the approach is repeated 20 times.
The box plot in Fig. 14 shows the required iterations. The required
iterations increase with the communication failure probability since the
high communication failure probability leads to more times of in-
formation exchanges. These observations demonstrate that the pro-
posed DCLR approach is robust to the unreliable communication si-
tuation.
5%1 Heavy critical load situation
This case considers a heavy critical load situation, in which the
available power amount of each individual DER is less than the amount
required by the heavy critical load. Under such situation, the combi-
nation of multiple DERs are required to restore the heavy critical load.
Assume that CL1 to be restored is 100 kW, and the available amounts of
DER1, DER2, and DER3 are 70 kW, 50 kW, and 60 kW. The available
amount of each DER is less than the demand amount of CL1.
First, CL1 agent broadcasts the demand information of 100 kW to all
agents by using the distributed max-consensus protocol. There is no
DER to respond the request from CL1 since there is no individual DER
with excessive power amount. After the first-time request broadcast,
CL1 agent knows about the situation and re-broadcast the request that
the combination of multiple DERs is required to restore the heavy cri-
tical load. The DBMC algorithm is activated to discover optimal re-
storation plan. The whole process lasts two rounds of discovery as
Electrical Power and Energy Systems 124 (2021) 106314
0.25
Unreliability indices
0.20
0.15
DER1
DER2 0.10
DER3 DER1
DER2
50 DER3
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Iterations
Fig. 15. The whole restoration plan discovery process for the heavy critical
load.
shown in Fig. 15. In the first-round discovery, DER3 is chosen for re-
storing CL1. While DER3 is not sufficient, then CL1 agent broadcasts the
deficiency of 40 kW and performs the second-round discovery. DER1 is
chosen and sufficient for the deficiency. Therefore, DER1 and DER3 are
combined to restore the heavy CL1.
80%
B. IEEE 123-node distribution system
In this section, the IEEE 123-node distribution system shown in
Fig. 16 is used to test the scalability of the proposed DCLR approach.
The test system consists of 5 DERs and 7 CLs. Parameters of DERs and
CLs are presented in Tables 3 and 4. Other data used for this case study
is available on [31].
1%1 Ideal situation on the IEEE 123-node distribution system
Assume that the subscripts of CLs in Fig. 16 represent the restoration
priorities. According to the restoration priorities, the restoration order
is from CL1 to CL7.
As shown in Fig. 17, the updating profiles of unreliability indices
from DERs to CL1 converge within 106 iterations. The proposed DCLR
approach discovers the optimal restoration plan with the minimum
unreliability index of 0.2994 among all the restoration plans. The op-
timal restoration plan is to use DER4 for restoring CL1 and the corre-
sponding restoration path, which can be obtained by recursively dis-
covering the parent nodes, is 56 → 55 → 54 → 94 → 93 → 91 → 89 →
87 → 86. Limited by space, the updating profiles of unreliability indices
from DERs to others CLs are not presented here, but the final results of
optimal restoration plans for CL2, CL3, CL4, CL5, CL6, and CL7 are
summarized in Table 5.
2%1 Topology changing situation
The distribution system topology is likely to be time-varying in the
aftermath of a disaster. This case is to test the performance of the
proposed DCLR approach under topology changing situation on the
IEEE 123-node distribution system.
Taking restoring CL1 as an example, assume the failure of lines
L13,18, L54,94 occurs during the restoration plan discovery process. Due
to the topology change, the proposed DCLR approach will be re-im-
plemented using the updated topology information. As shown in
Fig. 18, the updating profiles of unreliability indices from the DERs to
CL1 under topology changing situation in the IEEE 123-node distribu-
tion system converge successfully. The optimal restoration plan is to use
DER4 for restoring CL1 with the minimum unreliability index of 0.3508
and the restoration path is 56 → 55 → 54 → 57 → 60 → 160 → 67 →
8
L. Yang, et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 124 (2021) 106314

350
151 111 110 112 113 114
32 29 300
30 250 CL6
50 109
33 51
31 49
28 47 DER5
48 108
25 46
DER2 45 107
27 26 106
44 CL5 105
104
24 43 64 103
23 102
42 65
41 101 450
22 63 100
21 99
40 197 98
66
19 135 35 38 62 71
20 39 97
36 70
18 37 69
160 68
CL4 DER3 60 67 75
9 57 74
14 58 73
11 59 72 CL7
55 61 610 79
10 53 54 78
2 52 56 77
DER4
CL3 7 8 13 76 85
152 80
1
150 149 12 92 90 84
34 96 88
3 17 81
5 6
15 86 83
4 CL2 95 93 91 89 87 82
DER1
CL1
16

DER Critical load Switch

Fig. 16. The topology of the IEEE 123-node distribution system.

Table 3 1.5
Parameters of DERs in the IEEE 123-node Distribution System. DER1
Unreliability indices

1.2 DER2
DER Node Type Capacity/kW Availability ADER -ln(ADER) DER3
0.9 DER4
DER1 4 Renewable 150 0.93 0.0726 DER5
DER2 25 Renewable 100 0.92 0.0834 0.6
DER3 36 Storage 90 0.90 0.1054
DER4 56 Storage 100 0.89 0.1165 0.3
DER5 108 Renewable 120 0.88 0.1278 0.2994
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Iterations
Table 4
Parameters of CLs in the IEEE 123-node Distribution System. Fig. 17. Updating profiles of unreliability indices from the DERs to CL1 in the
Critical loads Node Load/kW IEEE 123-node distribution system.

CL1 86 50
CL2 17 60
This subsection is to compare the computation performance be-
CL3 10 30 tween the average-consensus algorithm used in [8] and the proposed
CL4 20 50 DCLR approach. The average-consensus algorithm in [8] is to just
CL5 46 45 realize the global information discovery, which is used as the inputs of
CL6 114 40
the restoration optimization. The tolerance error between two con-
CL7 75 20
secutive iterations in average-consensus algorithm is set to 10−6.
Taking the information discovery of average total net power as an ex-
72 → 76 → 86, which is different from the result in Section IV-B.1 ample, as shown in Figs. 19 and 20, the global information discovery
owing to the topology change. These results demonstrate the proposed processes of average total net power in the IEEE 13-node and 123-node
DCLR approach is robust to the topology changing situation. distribution systems converge within 231 and 9313 iterations, respec-
tively. In comparison, the proposed DCLR approach to discover the
C. Computation efficiency comparison with the average-consensus al- optimal restoration plan for restoring CL1 in these two test systems are,
gorithm in [8] respectively, 28 and 106 iterations with 0 tolerance error between two
consecutive iterations. Furthermore, in Table 6, the computation time

9
L. Yang, et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 124 (2021) 106314

Table 5
Optimal restoration plans in the IEEE 123-node Distribution System.
Critical loads Supply sources Restoration plan unreliability index Restoration path

CL1 DER4 0.2994 56 → 55 → 54 → 94 → 93 → 91 → 89 → 87 → 86

CL2 DER2 0.2252 25 → 23 → 21 → 18 → 13 → 34→15 → 17
CL3 DER2 0.2557 25 → 23 → 21 → 18 → 13 → 8 → 9 → 14 → 10
CL4 DER3 0.2994 36 → 35 → 135 → 18 → 19 → 20
CL5 DER3 0.3094 36 → 35 → 40 → 42 → 44 → 45 → 46
CL6 DER5 0.4190 108 → 109 → 110 → 112 → 113 → 114
CL7 DER4 0.4123 56 → 55 → 54 → 57 → 60 → 160 → 67 → 72 → 73 → 74 → 75

1.0
DER1 Table 6
Unreliability indices

DER2 Computation Time of The two Methods.

0.8
DER3
Computation Time/s
DER4
0.6
DER5
Average-consensus The proposed DCLR
0.4 algorithm in [8] approach

0.3508 IEEE 13-node distribution 1.932 0.029

0.2 system
IEEE 123-node distribution 6.020 1.479
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
system
Iterations
Fig. 18. Updating profiles of unreliability indices from the DERs to CL1 under
the topology changing situation in the IEEE 123-node distribution system. efficiency of the proposed DCLR approach.

40 6. Conclusions
Average total net power/kW

30
The CL restoration problem is formulated as a variant of SPP in this
20 paper. A new distributed multiagent based approach which takes ad-
X= 231 vantages of min/max-consensus, and bias min-consensus algorithms is
Y= 7.6923
10 proposed to discover the optimal CL restoration plan with the max-
imum reliability. The proposed approach only requires the neighboring
0 information exchange and is implemented based on a peer-to-peer
-10 communication protocol. Based on the numerical results, the following
conclusions can be summarized:
-20
0 50 100 150 200 250
(1) The proposed DCLR approach can efficiently discover an optimal CL
Iterations
restoration solution with a maximum reliability index for the dis-
Fig. 19. Global information discovery process of average total net power in the tribution system after a natural disaster.
IEEE 13-node distribution system. (2) The proposed DCLR approach is adaptive to topology changes, ro-
bust to unreliable communication network. Moreover, the proposed
5 DCLR approach holds the faster convergence speed and higher
Average total net power/kW

computation efficiency compared to the average-consensus algo-

4 rithm.

3 This paper mainly studies how to discover a restoration plan with

X= 9313
Y= 2.1557
the maximum reliability for the distribution system including DERs
after a natural disaster. Actually, the flexibility provided by the re-
2
sponsive load and MPS-type DER will facilitate the distribution system
resilience enhancement. In addition, uncertainties from renewable
1
based DER and load demands usually exist and will affect the load re-
storation. Therefore, the future work will focus on the following topics:
0 (1) studying how to incorporate the responsive load in the proposed
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Iterations DCLR method, (2) studying distribution system restoration considering
MPS dispatch on the road network, and (3) incorporating uncertainties
Fig. 20. Global information discovery process of average total net power in the
into the proposed DCLR method.
IEEE 123-node distribution system.

caused by the proposed DCLR approach is much less than that in the Declaration of Competing Interest
average-consensus algorithm under the IEEE 13-node and 123-node
distribution systems. Numerical tests are performed on a laptop with The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
Inter(R) Core (TM) i5-8265U 2.5 GHz CPU and 8 GB memory. These interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
results highlight the fast convergence speed and high computation ence the work reported in this paper.

10
L. Yang, et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 124 (2021) 106314

Appendix A

A.1. Convergence proof

The convergence proof of the proposed DBMC based CL restoration method in (14) is introduced as below.
Define the error between two consecutive iterations as follows:
0, i CL
ei (k ) = min{xj (k ) + URLINE, ij} xi (k ), i DER
j Ni (17)
The lower bound of ei , i and the corresponding node set are defined in (18) and (19):
e = min{|ei|}
i (18)

= argmin{|ei|}
i (19)
The upper bound of ei , i and the corresponding node set are defined in (20) and (21):
e¯ = max{|ei|}
i (20)
¯ = argmax{|ei|}
i (21)
To prove the stability of the proposed DBMC based CL restoration method, the following properties need to be validated.

(1) Property 1: The lower bound e defined in (18) for the proposed DBMC based CL restoration method (14) is monotonically non-decreasing.
Proof:. For ei (k ) in (17), based on Clarke’s generalized derivative [32], the following equations can be derived:
ei (k + 1) ei (k ) = 0, i CL (22)

ei (k + 1) ei (k ) = j {x j (k + 1) xj (k )} j {x i (k + 1) x i (k )}
j Pi j Pi

= j ej (k ) j ei (k ) = j (ej (k ) ei (k )), i DER

j Pi j Pi j Pi (23)
where Pi is the parent node set defined in (16), j satisfies the conditions: 0 j 1 and j = 1.
j Pi

Since = = ( CL DER ) =( CL ) +( DER ) and from (22) and (23), the difference of lower bound e is derived as
e (k + 1) e (k ) = i {ei (k + 1) ei (k )}
i

= i {ei (k + 1) ei (k )} + i {ei (k + 1) ei (k )}
i CL i DER

= j i (ej (k ) ei (k ))
i DER j Pi
(24)
where 0 i 1 and i = 1.
i

Since ej (k ) ei (k ), i ,j , the following relationship can be obtained:

e (k + 1) e (k ) 0 (25)
which indicates that the lower-bound sequence { e (k )} is monotonically non-decreasing. The proof of Property 1 is completed.

(2) Property 2: The upper bound ē defined in (20) for the proposed DBMC based CL restoration method (14) is monotonically non-increasing.

The proof procedure of Property 2 is similar to that of Property 1. Please refer to the proof of Property 1. Here, the proof of Property 2 is omitted.

(3) Property 3: When k tends to infinity, Pi , i , where and Pi are defined in (19) and (16).
Proof:. According to Property 1, e (k + 1) e (k ) 0 , then e (k ) e (0) . Similarity, according to Property 2, e¯ (k ) e¯ (0) .The following relationship can be
obtained:
e (0) e (k ) e (k ) e¯ (k ) e¯ (0) (26)
Therefore, e (k ) is thus both upper-bounded and monotonically non-decreasing.

Let lim e (k ) = c1, where c1 is a constant within the range e (0) c1 e¯ (0). From Property 1,
k
e (k + 1) e (k ) = j i (ej (k ) ei (k ))
i DER j Pi

= j i (ej (k ) e)
i DER j Pi
(27)

11
L. Yang, et al. Electrical Power and Energy Systems 124 (2021) 106314

To find the largest invariant set [33], consider e (k + 1) e (k + 1) = 0 , which results in j i (ej (k ) e) = 0 . Together with
i DER j Pi

ej (k ) e, j , then ej (k ) = e , i.e., j , j Pi , j . Based on the LaSall’e invariant set principle [33], lim ej (k ) = lim e (k ) = c holds.
k k
Then lim (ej (k ) e (k )) = 0 , j Pi , j . Together with (27), it is derived that lim ( e (k + 1) e (k )) = 0 .
k k
Based on above analysis, Pi , i when k tends to infinity. The proof of Property 3 is completed.

(4) Property 4: When k tends to infinity, Pi ¯, i ¯ , where ¯ and Pi are defined in (21) and (16).

The proof procedure of Property 4 is similar to that of Property 3. Please refer to the proof of Property 3. Here, the proof of Property 4 is omitted.

(5) Property 5: The state variable x i (k ) of the proposed DMBC based CL restoration method (14) is upper-bounded, k 0, i , for an un-
directed and connected graph G.
Proof:. According to Property 2, e¯ (k + 1) e¯ (k ) . Then
e¯ (k ) = max{ x i (k ) + min{xj (k ) + URLINE, ij}} e¯ (0), k 0, i
i j (28)
It follows that x p (k ) + URLINE, ip x i (k ) e¯ (0), p Pi, i ¯.

From Property 1, e (k + 1) e (k ), k 0 . It is further derived that e (0) ei (k ) e¯ (0), k 0 .

Recall that ei (k ) = x i (k ) + min{xj (k ) + URLINE, ij} = xi (k ) + x p (k ) + URLINE, ip , p Pi . Then e (0) x i (k ) + x p (k ) + URLINE, ip e¯ (0), p Pi ,
j Ni
i.e., x i (k ) e (0) + xp (k ) + URLINE, ip , p Pi .
According to the definition of Pi in (16), it is derived that
x i (k ) + URLINE, ip xj (k ) + URLINE, ij , j Ni, p Pi (29)
It follows that
x i (k ) e (0) + xj (k ) + URLINE, ij , j Ni (30)
As the graph is assumed to be undirected and connected, a path from the leader node i CL to a follower node i w DER can be always found.
Suppose the path contains w (w 2) nodes consisting of i and iw .
Considering x i (k ) e (0) + xj (k ) + URLINE, ij , j Ni , together with (30), it is derived that
x iw ( k ) e (0)(w 1) + max {x i (0)} + (w 1) max {URLINE, ij}
i CL (i, j ) E (31)
Then x i (k ) e (0)(w 1) + max {xi (0)} + (w 1) max {URLINE, ij }, i . The proof of Property 5 is completed.
i CL (i, j ) E

(6) Property 6: When k tends to infinity, CL with defined in (19) and CL denoting the leader node set for the proposed DBMC based CL
restoration method (14) under an undirected and connected graph.
Proof:. According to Property 1, Property 2, and the definitions of e in (18) and ē in (20), e (0) e (k ) e (k ) e¯ (k ) e¯ (0) and e (k + 1) e (k ) 0 for
k 0 . Similar to the proof of Property 3, lim e (k + 1) e (k ) = 0 , which implies that ei (k ) equals for i and ei (k ) 0 , i.e., when k ,
k
x i (k ) + min{xj (k ) + URLINE, ij } 0.
j Ni

Suppose when k , CL = . It is obtained that Pi ,i from the definition of Pi in (16) and the assumption that the graph is
undirected and connected. In addition, from property 3, Pi , i when k . Then, the following relationship is derived:
x p (k ) < min{xj (k ) + URLINE, ij} x i (k ), p Pi ,i
j (32)
when k . Let x min (k ) = lim min{x i (k )} , then
k i
x min (k ) x p (k ), p (33)
when k . From (32), x p (k ) x i (k ), p i when k . This contradicts with (33).Therefore, CL when k tends to infinity. The
proof of Property 6 is completed.
The following text is to use the above properties to conduct the proof of stability.

(7) Proof of Stability: The proof of stability is listed as follows.

From Property 1 and Property 2, let lim e (k ) = c1 and lim e¯ (k ) = c2 , where c1 and c2 are constant. Consider that the graph is undirected and
k k
connected, and from Property 6, CL when k . Therefore, there exists an i ( CL ) . Since ej (k ) = 0 for j CL and from the
definition of e in (18), it is obtained that lim e (k ) = 0 .
k
From the definition of ē in (20), ē 0 . From the proposed DBMC based CL restoration method (14), for i ¯ , it is obtained that
x i (k + 1) x i (k ) = ei (k ) = e¯ 0 . Note that lim e (k ) = 0 , then ei (k ) 0 when k . It follows that:
k
{xi (k + 1) x i (k )} | ¯ | lim e¯ (k )
i
k (34)
where | ¯ | denotes the number of nodes in ¯ . Obviously, the left-hand side of (34) is unbounded if lim e¯ (k ) > 0 . This is contradicted to Property 5
k
that x i (k ) > 0 is bounded. Therefore, lim e¯ (k ) = 0 .
k

12
L. Yang, et al.
Summarizing the above analysis, it is further derived that:
lim e (k ) = 0
k (35)
It follows from (35), (17) and (14) that
x i = x i (0), i CL
x i = min{x j + URLINE, ij}, i DER .
j Ni
where x i is the equilibrium point.
Therefore, the equilibrium point of the proposed DBMC based CL restoration method (14) is globally stable. So far, the convergence proof is
completed.
References
[1] Liu X, Hou K, Jia H, Zhao J, Mili L, Mu Y, Rim J, Lei Y. A resilience assessment
approach for power system from perspectives of system and component levels. Int J
Electr Power Energy Syst 2020;118:105837.
[2] Executive Office of the President, Economic benefits of increasing electric grid re-
silience to weather outages, Tech. Rep., 2013.
[3] Wang Y, Chen C, Wang J, Baldick R. Research on resilience of power systems under
natural disasters—A review. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2016;31(2):1604–13.
[4] Wang F, Xiao X, Sun Q, Chen C, Bin F, Chen S, Fan J. Service restoration for dis-
tribution network with DGs based on stochastic response surface method. Int J
Electr Power Energy Syst 2019;107:557–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2018.
12.015.
[5] Chen CS, Lin CH, Tsai HY. A rule-based expert system with colored Petri net models
for distribution system service restoration. IEEE Trans Power Syst
2002;17(4):1073–80.
[6] Lim SI, Lee SJ, Choi MS, Lim DJ, Ha BN. Service restoration methodology for
multiple fault case in distribution systems. IEEE Trans Power Syst
2006;21(4):1638–44.
[7] Chen B, Chen C, Wang J, Butler-Purry KL. Sequential service restoration for un-
balanced distribution systems and microgrids. IEEE Trans Power Syst
2018;33(2):1507–20.
[8] Chen C, Wang J, Qiu F, Zhao D. Resilient distribution system by microgrids for-
mation after natural disasters. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2016;7(2):958–66.
[9] Panwar M, Chanda S, Mohanpurkar M, Luo Y, Dias F, Hovsapian R, et al. Integration
of flow battery for resilience enhancement of advanced distribution grids. Int J
Electr Power Energy Syst 2019;109:314–24.
[10] Li J, Ma X-Y, Liu C-C, Schneider KP. Distribution system restoration with microgrids
using spanning tree search. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2014;29(6):3021–9.
[11] Wang Z, Wang J. Self-healing resilient distribution systems based on sectionaliza-
tion into microgrids. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2015;30(6):3139–49.
[12] Gao H, Chen Y, Xu Y, Liu C. Resilience-oriented critical load restoration using
microgrids in distribution systems. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2016;7(6):2837–48.
[13] Xu Y, Liu C, Schneider K, et al. Microgrids for Service Restoration to Critical Load in
a Resilient Distribution System. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2018;9(1):426–37.
[14] Zhu J, Yuan Y, Wang W. An exact microgrid formation model for load restoration in
resilient distribution system. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2020.;116:105568.
[15] Wang Y, Xu Y, He J, Liu CC, Schneider KP, Hong M, et al. Coordinating Multiple
Sources for Service Restoration to Enhance Resilience of Distribution Systems. IEEE
Trans Smart Grid 2019;10(5):5781–93. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.516541110.
1109/TSG.2019.2891515.
[16] Lei S, Wang J, Chen C, Hou Y. Mobile emergency generator pre-positioning and
13
Electrical Power and Energy Systems 124 (2021) 106314
(36)
real-time allocation for resilient response to natural disasters. IEEE Trans Smart
Grid 2018;9(3):2030–41.
[17] Lei S, Chen C, Zhou H, Hou Y. Routing and scheduling of mobile power sources for
distribution system resilience enhancement. IEEE Trans Smart Grid
2019;10(5):5650–62.
[18] Lei S, Chen C, Li Y, Hou Y. Resilient disaster recovery logistics of distribution
systems: co-optimize service restoration with repair crew and mobile power source
dispatch. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2019;10(6):6187–202.
[19] Poudel S, Dubey A. Critical load restoration using distributed energy resources for
resilient power distribution system. IEEE Trans Power Syst 2019;34(1):52–63.
[20] Sharma A, Srinivasan D, Trivedi A. A decentralized multiagent system approach for
service restoration using DG islanding. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 2015;6(6):2784–93.
[21] Xu Y, Liu W. Novel multiagent based load restoration algorithm for microgrid. IEEE
Trans Smart Grid 2011;2(1):152–61.
[22] Lin W, Bitar E. Decentralized Stochastic Control of Distributed Energy Resources.
IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2018;33(1):888–900.
[23] Gottschan M, Kaiser M, Waldmann C. The undirected two disjoint shortest paths
problem. Oper. Res. Lett. 2019;47(1):70–5.
[24] Zhang Y, Li S. Distributed biased min-consensus with applications to shortest path
planning. IEEE Trans Autom Control 2017;62(10):5429–36.
[25] Hosseinnezhad V, Rafiee M, Ahmadian M, Siano P. Optimal island partitioning of
smart distribution systems to improve system restoration under emergency condi-
tions. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 2018;97:155–64.
[26] SmartGrid.gov. Recovery Act Smart Grid Programs: Project Information. May 2014.
[Online].Available: https://www.smartgrid.gov/recovery_act /project_information.
[27] Nazmul Huda AS, Živanović R. Study effect of components availability on dis-
tribution system reliability through multilevel Monte Carlo method. IEEE Trans. Ind
Inform. 2019;15(6):3133–42.
[28] Kwasinski A. Quantitative evaluation of DC microgrids availability: effects of
system architecture and converter topology design choices. IEEE Trans Power
Electron 2011;26(3):835–51.
[29] Olfati-Saber R, Murray RM. Consensus protocols for networks of dynamic agents.
Proc. Amer. Control Conf. 2003. p. 951–6.
[30] Shi G, Xia W, Johansson K. Convergence of max–min consensus algorithms.
Automatica Dec. 2015;62:11–7.
[31] Data of the IEEE 123-node distribution system used for case studies. [Online]
Available: https://figshare.com/s/152ee0b81139532725eb.
[32] Zuoa Z, Ho DWC, Wang Y. Reachable set bounding for delayed systems with
polytopic uncertainties: The maximal Lyapunov-krasovskii functional approach.
Automatica May 2010;46(5):949–52.
[33] Isidori A. Nonlinear Control Systems. New York, NY, USA: Springer; 2013.