Optimal Photovoltaic System Design with Multi-Objective Optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, several parts of the world suffer from electrical black-outs due to high electrical demands during peak hours. Stationary photovoltaic (PV) collector arrays produce clean and sustainable energy especially during peak hours which are generally day time. In addition, PVs do not emit any waste or emissions, and are silent in operation. The incident energy collected by PVs is mainly dependent on the number of collector rows, distance between collector rows, dimension of collectors, collectors inclination angle and collectors azimuth, which all are involved in the proposed modeling in this article. The objective is to achieve optimal design of a PV farm yielding two conflicting objectives namely maximum field incident energy and minimum of the deployment cost. Two state-of-the-art multi-objective evolutionary algorithms (MOEAs) called Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm-II (NSGA-II) and Generalized Differential Evolution Generation 3 (GDE3) are compared to design PV farms in Toronto, Canada area. The results are presented and discussed to illustrate the advantage of utilizing MOEA in PV farms design and other energy related real-world problems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".