MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024032348 · doi:10.1016/j.procs.2012.09.080

Forecasting Power Output of Solar Photovoltaic System Using Wavelet Transform and Artificial Intelligence Techniques

2012· article· en· W2024032348 on OpenAlexaff
Paras Mandal, Surya Teja Swarroop Madhira, Ashraf Ul Haque, Julian Meng, Ricardo Pineda

Bibliographic record

VenueProcedia Computer Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePhotovoltaic systemGrid-connected photovoltaic power systemElectric power systemWavelet transformSolar powerElectricity generationMaximum power point trackingRenewable energyPower (physics)Reliability engineeringWaveletArtificial intelligenceElectrical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With increased penetration of solar as a variable energy resource (VER), solar photovoltaic (PV) power production is rapidly increasing into large-scale power industries. Since power output of PV systems depends critically on the weather, unexpected variations of their power output may increase the operating costs of the power system. Moreover, a major barrier in integrating this VER into the grid is its unpredictability, since steady output cannot be guaranteed at any particular time. This biases power utilities against using PV power since the planning and overall balancing of the grid becomes very challenging. Developing a reliable algorithm that can minimize the errors associated with forecasting the near future PV power generation is extremely beneficial for efficiently integrating VER into the grid. PV power forecasting can play a key role in tackling these challenges. This paper presents one-hour-ahead power output forecasting of a PV system using a combination of wavelet transform (WT) and artificial intelligence (AI) techniques by incorporating the interactions of PV system with solar radiation and temperature data. In the proposed method, the WT is applied to have a significant impact on ill-behaved PV power time-series data, and AI techniques capture the nonlinear PV fluctuation in a better way.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.197 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations208
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProcedia Computer ScienceSame topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207