Comprehensive Evaluation Method for Distribution Grids Based on Combination Weighting and Modified TOPSIS

Abstract

Grid planning has become a new and important method. In the process of implementing the grid planning for a distribution network, accurately evaluating the performance and advantages of each grid and identifying its weaknesses are prerequisites for a scientific, reasonable, and practical grid planning. Hence, this study introduces an evaluation approach for the construction of a distribution grid to make a pointed investment planning for it. First, an index system of a distribution grid was established. Second, the anti-entropy weight method (a-EWM) and the best-worst method (BWM) were introduced to compute the subjective and objective weights, respectively, and the combination weights were obtained using game theory. Finally, the technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) method was modified using cosine similarity and gray relational analysis (GRA). Results indicate that, (1) The first-level indexes in the evaluation index system here can be used to reflect the overall construction situation of each grid, and the second-level indexes can be employed to represent the weaknesses within each grid. (2) The combination weighting method based on game theory can combine the advantages of subjective and objective weighting methods and reflect the importance of various evaluation indexes accurately. (3) The drawbacks of the traditional TOPSIS method, where index correlation cannot be considered and only relative distance is calculated, resulting in inaccurate evaluation, can be avoided by the modified TOPSIS method, in which cosine similarity and gray relational analysis are adopted. Therefore, the use of combination weighting and the modified TOPSIS method can make the comprehensive evaluation value of a distribution grid more practical. The method here can be utilized to demonstrate the overall status quo and future development demands of distribution grids and compensate for the defects of the traditional evaluation method.