MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2400817954

What's Wrong with my Solar Panels: a Data-Driven Approach

2015· article· en· W2400817954 on OpenAlex
Peter Gao, Lukasz Golab, Srinivasan Keshav

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEDBT/ICDT Workshops · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicPhotovoltaic System Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDirtShadow (psychology)Simple (philosophy)SnowSolar powerComputer scienceMeteorologyEnvironmental sciencePower (physics)Remote sensingEngineeringMechanical engineeringGeographyPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Solar panels have been improving in eciency and dropping in price, and are therefore becoming more common and economically viable. However, the performance of solar panels depends not only on the weather, but also on other external factors such as shadow, dirt, dust, etc. In this paper, we describe a simple and practical data-driven method for classifying anomalies in the power output of solar panels. In particular, we propose and experimentally verify (using two solar panel arrays in Ontario, Canada) a simple classication rule based on physical properties of solar radiation that can distinguish between shadows and direct covering of the panel, e.g,. by dirt or snow.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.205 · 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