Harmonic Components Identification through
the Adaline with Fuzzy Learning Parameter
M. Mohseni
Shahid Chamran University, Ahvaz, Iran Islamic Azad University of Abadan, Abadan, Iran
m_mohseni@scu.ac.ir zamani60@yahoo.com
Abstract- Identification of different harmonic components of
current/voltage signals is required in many power system
applications e.g. power quality monitoring, active power filtering,
and digital system protection. In this paper, a method based on
the adaptive linear combiner (Adaline) is presented for harmonic
components identification. The convergence speed and the
estimation error of the Adaline are governed by the learning
parameter (LP) in the weight adaptation rule of this artificial
neural network. Thus, instead of a constant LP utilized in the
conventional Adaline, this paper proposes the implementation of a
fuzzy inference system (FIS) for suitable adjustment of the LP.
Two simulation studies are conducted on the MATLAB and
PSCAD/EMTDC to show the validity and performance of the
proposed method.
I. INTRODUCTION
The widespread application of non-linearly behaving power
electronic converters in current electrical distribution systems
leads to increasing level of harmonic components in
current/voltage signals. This severe level of harmonic
distortion in the electrical networks can cause several
difficulties related to network operation, protection and
control. The first step to alleviate this problem is the
identification of amplitude and phase angle of different
harmonic components for electrical network signals. Also, the
fast and accurate estimation of the voltage/current fundamental
frequency phasor is an essential prerequisite for successful
digital protection or control of the power systems.
Different harmonic components identification methods
have been proposed in literatures. Due to its low computational
requirements, the most commonly used harmonic identification
technique is based on the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT). The
description of FFT for estimating amplitude and phase of
harmonic components is well documented by [1-2]. Apart from
the classical algorithm, many extensions and improvements are
published [3-4]. These methods utilize the original FFT with
different windowing and interpolation techniques to produce
better tracks. The FFT based techniques are good for noise
rejection but have the inherent problems of spectral leakage,
aliasing and picket-fence phenomena.
For the sake of solving the aforementioned drawbacks, the
Recursive Least Square (RLS) algorithm has been proposed by
[5-6]. However, RLS algorithms are inaccurate in the presence
of decaying DC components and random noise. Alternatively,
the Kalman Filter (KF) has the capability of processing noisy
measurements and utilizes simple, linear and robust algorithm
to identify different harmonics components embedded in the
signal along with decaying DC and stochastic noise. The main
M. A. Zamani
drawbacks of this algorithm are the necessity of exact
definition of the states matrix and the bulk calculations that
limit its on-line application [7-8].
Finally, many algorithms are proposed for the estimation of
power system harmonic components based on Artificial Neural
Networks (ANN) [9-12]. The two main groups of the ANN
based methods use the BackPropagation (BP) [9-10] and Least
Mean Square (LMS) based structures [11-12]. Although the
requirement of the huge data set for the ANN training,
inaccurate results in the case of untaught input data, and large
fluctuation in the presence of random noise severely deteriorate
the performance of the BP based ANN for the harmonic
components tracking [12], using the LMS based ANN lead to
promising results for harmonic component identification
problem. The main merits of the Adaline as a LMS adaptive
filter are the simplicity of structure, high speed of convergence,
and noise rejection [11]. The structure and characteristics
contributing these advantages for Adaline are comprehensively
studied in the section III.
The learning parameter is a key factor to the design of
Adaline, which governs the steady-state performance and
convergence characteristic of this ANN block [13]. In fact,
small learning parameter decreases the estimation error, but at
the expense of decreasing convergence speed. On the other
hand, choosing large LP increases the convergence speed, yet
the estimation error dramatically rises. Therefore, there is a
trade-off in selecting the value of LP to get fast convergence
with minimum estimation error, and it is difficult to determine
fixed LP appropriate for all situations.
Different methods have been proposed for suitable
adjustment of the LP [14-18]. However, those approaches
require the user to select additional constants and to translate
some linguistic rules on LP adjustment into numerical
algorithm. In many cases it is difficult to select the best
constant and to do the appropriate translation. Thus, instead of
interpreting these linguistic rules into mathematical model,
directly implementing the linguistic model by using Fuzzy
Inference Systems (FIS) for the instantaneous LP adjustment is
proposed in literatures [12, 19-21].
In this paper, we propose a novel FIS for suitable
adjustment of the LP. Indeed, the proposed FIS adjusts the LP
for the next 5 mSecond (a quarter of fundamental time period
for f=50 Hz) according to the average square error and the
variation of the average square error of the Adaline in the
previous 5 mSecond. This partial adjustment method has some
computational benefits over the method proposed by [12].
 This paper is divided into six sections. Section II presents III. THE ADALINE STRUCTURE
the problem formulation, which is appropriate for the harmonic The adaptive linear combiner, Adaline, was firstly
components identification by the proposed method. Section III introduced by Widrow and Lehr in 1960 and then widely used
and IV completely explain the conventional Adaline structure in many applications e.g. communication devices and digital
and the proposed FIS for partial adjustment of the LP. signal processing [13]. The Adaline is a multi-input, single-
Simulation results based on both MATLAB and output, single layer linear ANN element, boasts the following
PSCAD/EMTDC programs are represented in section V to characteristics:
investigate the performance of the proposed identification • Self adaptive and on-line weight adaptation according
method. Finally, the paper is concluded in section VI. to the input vector and desired output at each iteration;
• Low computational burden and simple structure,
II. PROBLEM FORMULATION which makes it easily implemented on hardware and
Assume the waveform of the power system voltage/current for real-time applications.
with a fundamental angular frequency, ω 0 , as the sum of Graphically, the Adaline is represented by the construction
different harmonic components of unknown magnitudes and shown in Fig. 1. Where the k is the iteration index, the input
phase angles. The general form of the signal is vector X (k ) = [X1 (k ) X 2 (k ) L X N (k ) ] is multiplied by the weighting
N vector W (k ) = [W1 (k ) W 2 (k )LW N (k ) ] , and then these weighted
y (t ) = ∑ A sin (lω t + ϕ ) + ε (t )
l =1
l 0 l
(1)
inputs are summed to produce the linear output y (k ) = W (k )X (k ) .
where Al and ϕ l are the amplitude and phase angle of the l th The filter output y(k ) must be precisely mimic to the desired
harmonic component, respectively; N is the total number of output d (k ) , so the weight vector is adjusted utilizing the LMS
harmonic components, and ε (t ) is the noise of measurement. adaptation rule. This rule is also known as Widrow–Hoff Delta
In some situations such as single phase to ground fault, a rule and described by
α e( k ) X ( k ) (8)
decaying DC component is superimposed to power system W (k + 1) = W (k ) +
signals, so the resulted waveform is described by X T (k ) X (k )
N where e(k ) = d (k ) − y(k ) is the estimation error, and α is the
y (t ) = ∑
l =1
Al sin (lω 0 t + ϕ l ) + Adc e − βt + ε (t ) (2) learning parameter (LP). The LP is a constant quantity
determined based on the statistics of input vector. Analytically,
The time-discrete version of (2) is in order to assure of the LMS convergence, the LP must be
N − βk
y (k ) = ∑ A sin (lθ + ϕ ) + A
l =1
l l dc e
fs
+ ε (k ) (3) 0 ≤ α < abs⎛⎜ 2 ⎞⎟ , where η is the minimum eigenvalues of the
⎝ η⎠
Where θ = 2πk and Ns is sampling rate given by input auto-correlation matrix.
N s When perfect learning is attained, the estimation error will
Ns =
fs , where f o is the nominal power frequency and f s is be brought down to near the zero, and the estimated output
fo
becomes equal to d (k ) = W0 X (k ) , where W0 is the weight vector
the sampling frequency.
By using the first order Taylor series expansion for the after the complete algorithm convergence. Thus, the neural
decaying DC component and the triangular equality model exactly estimates the incoming signal parameters.
sin(α + β ) = sin(α )cos(β ) + cos(α )sin(β ) , Eq.(3) can be rewritten as
d (k )
N
X1 W1
y (k ) = ∑ [A sin (ϕ ) cos(lθ ) + A cos(ϕ )sin (lθ )]
l l l l
(4)
+
l =1

+ Adc −
Adc β k
+ ε (k )
X2 W2 y (k )
fs
Rearranged the above equation in the matrix form is M M W 2 N −1
y (k ) = Φ T Θ(k ) (5) X 2 N −1 e(k )
where y (k ) represents the measurement at each iteration, Φ is
W2 N
the parameters to be identified, and θ (k ) is the time varying X 2N
observation matrix, as represented in (6)-(7).
Φ = [ A1 sin(ϕ1 ) A1 cos(ϕ1 ) A2 sin(ϕ 2 ) A2 cos(ϕ 2 )L
(6)
L AN sin(ϕ N ) Adc Adc β ]
LMS
Weight
Θ(k ) = [cos(θ ) sin (θ ) cos(2θ ) sin (2θ )L Adaptation
(7)
L cos(Nθ ) sin (Nθ ) 1 − k ]
fs
Fig.1 The Adaline structure
 The convergence of LMS adaptation rule in Lyapunov way
is studied by considering the ζ (k ) as
ζ (k ) = [W (k ) − W0 ]2 − [W (k − 1) − W0 ]2
It can be proved with some manipulation in (8) that
⎡ αX T (k )X (k ) ⎤ ⎡ αe 2 (k ) ⎤ through the membership functions (MBFs). The corresponding
ζ (k ) ≤ ⎢ − 2 ⎥ × ⎢ ⎥ (10)
⎢⎣ λ + X (k )X (k ) ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ λ + X (k )X (k ) ⎥⎦
T T
, so ζ (k ) ≤ 0 0 ≤ α < abs⎛⎜ 2 ⎞⎟ and λ > 0 . To
for
⎝ η⎠
summarize, in the learning procedure, the weight adaptation
rule constantly reduces the Euclidean distance between the
instantaneous weight and desired weight vector i.e.
W (k ) −W 0 → 0 for k → ∞ [11].
In order to estimate the harmonic components of a power
signal via the Adaline, the variables Θ and Φ in (6)-(7) are
simply assigned to X and W in (8) [11]. In this way, the
weight vector yields the Fourier coefficients of power signal
after the estimation error converges to zero, as
W0 = [A1 sin ϕ1 A1 cos ϕ1 A2 sin ϕ 2 A2 cos ϕ 2
L AN sin ϕ N AN cos ϕ N Adc Adc β ]T
(11)
The amplitude and phase angle of n th harmonic can be
estimated by
An = w02 ( 2 n − 1) + w02 ( 2 n )
The fuzzy inference systems are based on the principal of
fuzzy logic that firstly introduced by Zadeh [23] and comprises
three main stages: Fuzzification, Fuzzy Inference, and
(9) Defuzzification. In the Fuzzification stage, the crisp input
variables are transformed to the respective fuzzy degree
MBFs are illustrated in Fig. 3. In the second stage, the fuzzy
rule base is constructed by sets of fuzzy IF-THEN rules. These
rules come from matching input-output pairs through different
case studies adaptation procedure and represented in Table I.
For example, IF the average square error is “Small” AND the
variation of average square error is “Large,” THEN the LP is
“Medium.”
For implementing the fuzzy inference, the multiple
fuzzified input variables, degrees of the antecedents (IF-part),
are combined by the “min” operator in each rule. This is
followed by the implication process, which defines the
reshaping task of the consequent (THEN-part) of the fuzzy rule
The Adaline d (k )
X (k )
y (k) +
Linear
Combiner
W (k )
(12) e(k )

Delay
and LMS
Weight
ϕ n = tan −1 ⎛⎜W0 (2n − 1) W ( 2n) ⎞⎟ (13)
⎝ 0 ⎠ Adaptation
α (k )
IV. THE FIS STRUCTURE e 2 (k ) Clock
In this paper, we propose a Fuzzy Inference System (FIS)
for the suitable adjustment of the Learning Parameter. At each e 2 (m)
quarter of the fundamental time period, the FIS utilizes the Rule Base Ave
Defuzzification

Fuzzification
average square error e 2 (m ) and the variation of average square

error ∆ e 2 (m ) , for m = a
Ns
and a = 1,2, L defined by Inference + Delay
Engine
m
4 ∆ e 2 (m )
∑ (d (l ) − y(l ))
N
2

l =m− s
e 2 (m ) = 4
(14) The Fuzzy Inference System
Ns
4 Fig. 2 The structure of the proposed method

∆e 2 (m ) = e 2 (m ) − e 2 ⎛⎜ m − N s 4 ⎞⎟
⎝ ⎠
, as the inputs to adjust the LP, α (k ) , for the following time
step (Fig. 2). Thus, the LP is partially adjusted by
⎧
α (k ) = ⎨
2
{
⎪ FIS e (m ) , ∆ e (m )
2
} if ⎛⎜⎜⎝ k mod N4 ⎞⎟⎟⎠ = 0
s
(15)
⎪α (k − 1)
⎩ otherwise
In this FIS, using the average values instead of the
instantaneous values proposed by [12] dramatically reduces the
computational burden of the method and also eliminates
undesirable fluctuations of the LP estimated based on the
instantaneous input variables. Fig. 3 MBFs of inputs and output variables
 Fig. 5 The estimated amplitude and phase angle of the fundamental frequency and third harmonic by the conventional Adaline and the proposed method

based on the antecedent. The input for the implication process This signal is fed to the both conventional and proposed
is a single number given by the antecedent, and the output is a Adaline. Fig. 5 shows the estimated amplitude and phase angle
fuzzy set. A min (minimum) operation is generally employed of the fundamental frequency and third harmonic component
to truncate the output fuzzy set form each rule. Finally, since by these two methods. In this figure, because of the space
decisions are based on the testing of all of the rules in the FIS, limitation, the estimated amplitude and phase angle of each
the rules need to be combined in some manner in order to make harmonic component are simultaneously illustrated in one
a decision. Aggregation is the process by which the fuzzy sets picture with two different ‘Y’ axes. Moreover, the most
that represent the outputs of each rule are combined into a appropriate constant LP for the conventional Adaline is
single fuzzy set. The max (maximum) operator is used for the obtained equal to 0.3 through trial-and-error. Regarding to Fig.
aggregation. 5, It is clear that the proposed method succeeded in the
In the third stage to determine the crisp LP of the next time estimation of the harmonic components accurately after almost
step, the fuzzy outputs need to be defuzzified. The centroid one cycle (roughly 20 mSecond), which is much quicker than
defuzzification scheme is used in this work [24]. the conventional Adaline with three cycles for convergence.
TABLE I
Fuzzy Rules
V. SIMULATIONS
The proposed algorithm is comprehensively tested and e2
compared with the conventional Adaline through two different α S M L
case studies. The first case utilizes an artificial signal S S L L
comprising different harmonic components, decaying DC ∆e 2
component, and noise with known parameters. This signal is M S M L
generated on the MATLAB program and fed to the both L M M M
conventional Adaline and proposed method. Here, the
TABLE II
improvement achieved by the fuzzy partial LP adjustment is The parameters of the simulated signal on the MATLAB
investigated. In addition, the FIS input variables and Harmonic 1st order 2nd order 3rd order 5th order
corresponding output variable are illustrated.
Parameters A1 ϕ1 A2 ϕ 2 A3 ϕ 3 A5 ϕ 5
The second case study is dedicated to test the proposed
algorithm under real-time conditions. A simple distribution 0 ≤ t < 0.1 1.5 -60 0.2 -45 0.1 135 0.1 60
system with switchable linear and non-linear load is simulated 0.1≤t < 0.2 1 90 0.3 90 0.3 45 0 0
on the PSCAD/EMTDC, and the acquired current signals are
fed to the proposed method programmed on the MATLAB
program.
• The first case study
In order to validate the efficiency of the proposed method
and compare it with the conventional Adaline, an artificial
signal with known parameters is generated on the MATLAB.
This signal includes different harmonic components with
dynamic changes in both amplitudes and phase angles at
t=0.1Second, as detailed in the Table II and illustrated in Fig.4.
The generated signal is also corrupted with an exponentially
decaying dc component of 0.05 exp (-5t) and a random noise of
variance 0.01. Fig. 4 The waveform of simulated signal on the MATLAB
Fig. 9 a. The load current signal b. The estimation of the fundamental frequency component
Fig. 6 The estimation time for different harmonic components
Fig. 7 The FIS inputs and output variables for the first case study
Fig. 8 The simulated distribution system on the PSCAD/EMTDC
c. The estimation of the fifth harmonic component
The high convergence speed of the proposed method is also
confirmed by Fig. 6 showing the convergence time of both
methods for different harmonic components. From this figure,
it is observed that the using fuzzy learning parameter almost
halve the estimation time of the Adaline. Besides, the
estimation time rises for the higher harmonic order because
these components fluctuate at a higher rate in comparison with
the fundamental frequency component.
As mentioned above, this improvement in the Adaline
algorithm is achieved by the FIS appropriate adjustment of the
learning parameter. The FIS inputs and corresponding output
for this case study are illustrated in Fig. 7. It is obviously seen
that once the dynamic changes occur, the FIS increases the
learning parameter in order to accelerate the estimation speed
of new harmonics parameters. On the other hand, as the time
passed and the estimation error reduced by the LMS weights
adaptation rule, the learning parameter is decreased by the FIS
to suppress the estimation errors, fluctuations.
• The second case study
The second case study is aimed toward testing the proposed
method under real-time conditions. A simple distribution
system with switchable linear and non-linear load, Fig. 8, is
implemented on the PSCAD/EMTDC. The acquired current
signal is fed to the algorithm programmed on the MATLAB.
The system parameters are given in Appendix A, and a
sampling rate of 64 samples per cycle is used.
Three subsequent switching events are considered in this
case study: the six-pulse converter is connected to the voltage
source at t=0, the linear load is also connected to the network
at t=0.1Second, and finally the Breaker 1 opens at t=0.2Second
and disconnects the non-linear load from the network. The
acquired load current due to these breakers operations is shown
in Fig. 9.a. Fig. 9.b represents the estimated amplitude and
waveform of the fundamental frequency component. It is clear
that the proposed method accurately identifies the harmonic
parameters after almost 20mSecond, which confirms the results
of the artificial signal in the first case study. Moreover, Fig. 9.c
represents the estimated amplitude and phase angle of the fifth
harmonic component.
 TABLE III
The estimated parameters of different harmonic components for the second case study
Harmonic 1st order 5th order
Parameter A1 ϕ1 A5 ϕ5
0 ≤ t < 0.1 Second 92 -6 17 -33
0.1 ≤ t < 0.2 Second 170 -8 17 -33
0.2 ≤ t < 0.3 Second 79 -10 0 0
For the acquired current signal illustrated in Fig. 9.a,
estimated parameters of predominant harmonic components are
represented in Table III. Regarding to this table, it is observed
the current signal comprises only 6k ± 1, k = 1, 2, 3, L
harmonic components in the first and second time interval.
Theoretically, this seems true for a six-pulse converter load.
After the second load switching and connection of the linear
load to the network, only the fundamental frequency
parameters change and other parameters stay constant because
the linear load does not include any harmonic components.
Lastly, once Breaker1 opens and the non-linear load is
disconnected from the network, the fundamental frequency
component reduces to the linear load current, and all harmonic
components are plummeted to zero.
VI. CONCLUSION
The Adaline is a well-known method for the harmonic
estimation problem due to the simple structure and low
computational burden. However, in the weight adaptation rule
of this ANN, the choice of the learning parameter reflects a
tradeoff between the convergence speed and the estimation
error. While the conventional Adaline utilizes a constant
learning parameter, this paper proposes a FIS to suitably
adjustment of the learning parameter at each time step. The
proposed FIS uses two inputs, the average square error and the
variation of average square error, to provide the appropriate
learning parameter for the next time step. Lastly, a numerical
case study on the MATLAB proves the superiority of the
proposed algorithm over the conventional Adaline. Also, the
performance of proposed method under real-time conditions is
studied through the simulation of a simplified distribution
system on the PSCAD/EMTDC.
Appendix A-
The voltage source specifications are:
V S (rms / line) = 200volt , f = 50 Hz , and R S = 0.377Ω . The
apparent power of the linear load is a 50 KVA with
cos φ = 0.8 . The non-linear load is a six-pulse converter fed a
load of Rdc = 2.5Ω .
REFERENCES
[1] E. Oran Brigham, The Fast Fourier transformer and its applications,
Prentice Hall International, 1988.
[2] J. Harris, “On the use of window for harmonic analysis with DFT,” Proc.
IEEE, Vol. 66, pp. 51-83, 1978.
[3] G.H. Hostetter, “Recursive Discrete Fourier Transformation,” IEEE Trans.
Acoust. Speech Signal Process. 28, pp. 180–184, 1980.
7th order 11th order 13th order
A7 ϕ7 A11 ϕ11 A13 ϕ13
6.5 -40 1.8 -108 1.4 -75
6.5 -40 1.8 -108 1.4 -75
0 0 0 0 0 0
[4] J. Xi and J.F. Chicharo, “A New Algorithm for Improving the Accuracy of
Periodic Signal Analysis,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas., vol. 45, pp. 827–831,
1996.
[5] M. S. Sachdev and M. Nagpal, “A Recursive Least Error Squares
Algorithm for Power System Relaying and Measurement Applications,” IEEE
Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 6, pp. 1008–1015, 1991.
[6] M. Joorabian, M. Mohseni, I. Sadinejad, “Using an Adaptive Recursive
Filter to Harmonic Component Estimation”, Proc. Iranian Conf. on Elect.
Eng., Tehran, 2006.
[7] H. Ma and A.A. Girgis, “Identification and tracking of harmonic sources in
a power system using Kalman filter,” IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 11, pp.
1659–1665, 1996.
[8] H.M. Al-Hamadi and S.A. Soliman, “Kalman filter for identification of
power system fuzzy harmonic components,” Elect. Power Syst. Res., vol. 62,
pp. 241-248, 2002.
[9] K. Hartana, and G. G. Richards, “Harmonic source monitoring and
identification using neural networks,” IEEE Trans. Power Systems, Vol. 5, pp.
1098-1 104, 1990.
[10] H. Mori, “An artificial neural network based method for power system
voltage harmonics,” IEEE Trans. on Power Delivery, Vol. 7, pp. 402-409,
1992.
[11] P. K. Dash, O. P. Swain, A. C. Liew, and S. Rahman, “An adaptive linear
combiner for on-line tracking of power system harmonics,” IEEE Trans.
Power Systems, vol. 11, pp. 1730-1735, 1996.
[12] P. K. Dash, S. K. Panda, B. Mishra, and D. P. Swain, “Fast tracking of
transient power system signals using fuzzy LMS algorithm,” Elect. Power &
Energy Systems, Vol. 20, pp. 555–561, 1998.
[13] B. Widrow and M. A. Lehr, “30 years of adaptive neural networks:
perceptrons, madaline and Backpropagation,” Proc. IEEE, vo1.78, pp. 1415-
1442, 1990.
[14] R. W. Harris, D. M. Chabries, and F. A. Bishop, “A Variable Step (VS)
Adaptive Filter Algorithm,” IEEE Trans. Acoust., Speech, Signal Process., vol.
ASSP-34, pp. 309–316, 1986.
[15] J. Soo and K. K. Pang, “A multistep size (MSS) frequency domain
adaptive filter,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 39, pp. 115–121, 1991.
[16] R. H. Kwong and E.W. Johnston, “A variable step size LMS algorithm,”
IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 40, pp. 1633–1642, 1992.
[18] V. J. Mathews and Z. Xie, “A stochastic gradient adaptive filter with
gradient adaptive step size,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 41, pp. 2075–
2087, 1993.
[19] J. B. Evans, P. Xue, and B. Liu, “Analysis and implementation of variable
step size adaptive algorithms,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 41, pp. 2517–
2535, 1993.
[20] W. S. Gan, “Designing a fuzzy step size LMS algorithm,” Proc. Inst.
Elect. Eng., Vision, Image, Signal Process., vol. 144, pp. 261–266, 1997.
[21] J. Sanubari, “Fast convergence LMS adaptive filters employing fuzzy
partial updates,” in Proc. Conf. Convergent Technol. Asia-Pacific Reg., vol. 4,
pp. 1334–1337, 2003.
[22] H.Y. Lin, C. C. Hu, Y. F. Chen, and J. H. Wen, “An Adaptive Robust
LMS Employing Fuzzy Step Size and Partial Update,” IEEE Letters. Signal
Process., vol. 12, pp.545-548, 2005.
[23] L. A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy sets,” Inf. Control, vol. 8, pp. 338–353, 1965.
[24] C. Von Altrock, Fuzzy Logic and Neurofuzzy Applications Explained.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1995.