MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151161713 · doi:10.1109/tie.2006.878355

Real-Time Identification of Optimal Operating Points in Photovoltaic Power Systems

2006· article· en· W2151161713 on OpenAlexaff
Weidong Xiao, M.G.J. Lind, W.G. Dunford, A. Capel

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicPhotovoltaic System Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaximum power point trackingPhotovoltaic systemControl theory (sociology)Maximum power principleComputer scienceOperating pointPower (physics)IrradianceVoltageElectronic engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photovoltaic power systems are usually integrated with some specific control algorithms to deliver the maximum possible power. Several maximum power point tracking (MPPT) methods that force the operating point to oscillate have been presented in the past few decades. In the MPPT system, the ideal operation is to determine the maximum power point (MPP) of the photovoltaic (PV) array directly rather than to track it by using the active operation of trial and error, which causes undesirable oscillation around the MPP. Since the output features of a PV cell vary with environment changes in irradiance and temperature from time to time, real-time operation is required to trace the variations of local MPPs in PV power systems. The method of real-time estimation proposed in this paper uses polynomials to demonstrate the power-voltage relationship of PV panels and implements the recursive least-squares method and Newton-Raphson method to identify the voltage of the optimal operating point. The effectiveness of the proposed methods is successfully demonstrated by computer simulations and experimental evaluations of two major types of PV panels, namely: 1) crystalline silicon and 2) copper-indium-diselenide thin film

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)0.002
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
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations260
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Industrial ElectronicsSame topicPhotovoltaic System Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207