Control algorithm based on an experimental approach for PEM fuel cell systems efficiency optimization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nowadays, PEM fuel cells are considered as one of the most promising electric energy production technology using hydrogen. For this reason, tracking the efficiency of the PEM fuel cell system is an important research topic. Most of the control algorithms developed to aim this goal are based on models of the PEMFC although to date there is no complete model which takes into account all the phenomenon related to the PEMFC. In this paper, we propose a control algorithm based on an experimental approach which searches for operation parameters (stack temperature, air relative humidity and air stoichiometric ratio) to optimize the efficiency of the PEMFC system. Indeed, an experimental study done beforehand showed that by acting on these parameters, the efficiency of the system which depends highly on the electric power generated by the stack, on the power lost in the auxiliaries and on the hydrogen flow rate, can be optimized. The developed algorithm is based on a local optimization method derived from the line search method. The validity of this method has been proven with different classic functions and the control algorithm has been implemented experimentally in the control interface of our PEMFC system. The experiments analysis showed promising results.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".