## 6 Numeric Simulation Result
### Loss Allocation  
Table 4 shows line loss tracing result of each generator. Coal_1 acts as a major loss reducer as the numeric result shown in the table and the proposed method do not show zero loss distribution.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{\
\begin{tabular}{c} **Branch** \\ **from to** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **Solution Loss** \\ **(MW) \({}^{\star}\) 1** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Coal_T\_s Contribution (MW)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Gas_2\% Contribution (MW)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Wind_3\% Contribution (MW)**} \\ \cline{3-8}  & & **Proposed** & **[Bialek]** & **Proposed** & **[Bialek]** & **Proposed** & **[Bialek]** \\ \hline
1–2 & 0.91 & \(-\)1.07 & 0.9 & 1.05 & 0 & 0.93 & 0 \\ \hline
1–4 & 1.09 & 0.74 & 1.1 & 0.19 & 0 & 0.16 & 0 \\ \hline
1–5 & 1.07 & \(-\)0.02 & 0.8 & 0.32 & 0 & 0.77 & 0 \\ \hline
2–3 & 0.04 & \(-\)1.60 & 0.0357 & 0.39 & 0.064 & 1.25 & 0 \\ \hline
2–4 & 1.51 & \(-\)0.24 & 0.536 & 0.97 & 0.964 & 0.78 & 0 \\ \hline
2–5 & 0.50 & \(-\)0.48 & 0.179 & 0.54 & 0.321 & 0.44 & 0 \\ \hline
2–6 & 0.58 & \(-\)0.37 & 0.179 & 0.32 & 0.321 & 0.64 & 0 \\ \hline
3–5 & 1.09 & \(-\)1.19 & 0.018 & 0.63 & 0.033 & 1.66 & 1.049 \\ \hline
3–6 & 1.00 & 0.25 & 0.016 & 0.13 & 0.030 & 0.62 & 0.954 \\ \hline
4–5 & 0.04 & \(-\)1.74 & 0.013 & 0.76 & 0.027 & 1.02 & 0 \\ \hline
5–6 & 0.05 & \(-\)1.37 & 0.023 & 0.59 & 0.011 & 0.83 & 0.016 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{\star}\) 1: Load flow program solution.  
\end{table}
Table 4: Comparison of active power loss distribution.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{\begin{tabular}{c} **Load Bus** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Coal_1**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Gas_2**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Wind_3**} & \multirow{2}{*}{\
\begin{tabular}{c} **AC Flow** \\ **Solution** \\ **P (p.u.)** \\ \end{tabular} } & \multirow{2}{*}{
\begin{tabular}{c} **AC Flow** \\ **Solution** \\ **(a)** \\ \end{tabular} } \\ \hline
**4** &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Proposed** \\ **[PERSON]** \\ **[PERSON]** \\ \end{tabular} & 0.3992 & 57.03 & 0.1506 & 21.52 & 0.1501 & 21.45 & 0.6999 & \\
27.4 &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Proposed** \\ **[PERSON]** \\ \end{tabular} & 0.4137 & 59.1 & 0.2863 & 40.9 & 0 & 0 & 0.7 & \\ \hline
**5** &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Proposed** \\ **[PERSON]** \\ **[PERSON]** \\ \end{tabular} & 0.3861 & 55.16 & 0.1444 & 20.63 & 0.1695 & 24.21 & 0.7 & \\
27.4 &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Proposed** \\ **[PERSON]** \\ **[PERSON]** \\ \end{tabular} & 0.4227 & 60.39 & 0.1099 & 15.7 & 0.1674 & 23.91 & 0.7 & 0.7 \\
27.4 &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Proposed** \\ **[PERSON]** \\ **[PERSON]** \\ \end{tabular} & 0.3148 & 44.97 & 0.1012 & 14.46 & 0.1988 & 40.57 & 0.7 & \\ \hline
**6** &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Proposed** \\ **[PERSON]** \\ **[PERSON]** \\ \end{tabular} & 0.3643 & 52.04 & 0.1461 & 20.88 & 0.1896 & 27.08 & 0.7 & \\
27.4 &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Proposed** \\ **[PERSON]** \\ **[PERSON]** \\ \end{tabular} & 0.1079 & 15.42 & 0.1802 & 25.74 & 0.4119 & 58.84 & 0.7 & 0.7 \\
27.4 &
\begin{tabular}{c} **Proposed** \\ **[PERSON]** \\ **[PERSON]** \\ \end{tabular} & 0.3148 & 44.97 & 0.1012 & 14.46 & 0.1988 & 40.57 & 0.7 & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{\star}\) 1: Load flow system solution.  
\end{table}
Table 3: Active load tracing and reactive load tracing results.