MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155576501 · doi:10.1049/iet-rpg.2013.0094

Generalised model of a photovoltaic panel

2014· article· en· W2155576501 on OpenAlexaff
Shah Arifur Rahman, Rajiv K. Varma, Tim Vanderheide

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Renewable Power Generation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicPhotovoltaic System Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsBluewater Power Distribution (Canada)Western University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoltaic systemPanel dataComputer scienceEconometricsEngineeringMathematicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The modelling of photovoltaic (PV) solar panels requires electrical parameters which are dependent on the manufacturing materials and their physical properties. Manufacturers typically do not disclose detailed physical properties of the PV module, except for some electrical quantities such as open circuit voltage ( V oc ), short‐circuit current ( I sc ), maximum power point voltage ( V m ), maximum power point current ( I m ) and maximum power ( P M ). However, to model the PV panels comprehensively, it is necessary to determine other physical parameters, e.g., series resistance of PV cell ( R s ), shunt resistance of PV cell ( R Sh ) and diode ideality factor ( n ). This paper presents a generalised mathematical model of a PV panel utilising only the quantities provided in manufacturer's datasheet. The proposed modelling technique determines all the PV panel parameters without any explicit repetitive iteration. Although the developed model is general and can be implemented on any software platform, its implementation is demonstrated on a commercial electromagnetic transients simulation software electro magnetic transient including direct current power systems computer aided design. The electrical parameters obtained from the proposed PV panel model are validated for six different commercially available PV panels from their datasheet values and also from measurements provided by National Institute of Standards and Technology for solar irradiation and temperature at nonstandard test conditions.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.241
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

Citations160
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET Renewable Power GenerationSame topicPhotovoltaic System Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207