MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3174548240 · doi:10.18280/jesa.540302

Maximum Power Point Tracking in the Photovoltaic Module Using Incremental Conductance Algorithm with Variable Step Length

2021· article· en· W3174548240 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Giulio Lorenzini, Mehrdad Ahmadi Kamarposhti, Ahmed Solyman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicPhotovoltaic System Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaximum power point trackingMaximum power principlePhotovoltaic systemTracking (education)CorrectnessPower (physics)AlgorithmComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Point (geometry)Variable (mathematics)Power optimizerLimit (mathematics)Electronic engineeringMathematicsEngineeringControl (management)Electrical engineeringArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tracking maximum power in photovoltaic applications is considered a major issue. Because of the change in the output power of solar cells by changing the radiation and temperature, it is required to receive the maximum power from solar array to be achieved the maximum efficiency using maximum power tracking methods. A large number of the maximum power methods have been introduced so far, but each has difficulty in terms of tracking speed and accuracy, and in practice, they have not been able to improve both of these factors. Among the commonly used methods, the incremental conductance method has a good tracking speed and accuracy, but at the same time, it cannot reach both to a desirable value. In this paper, a new method is proposed based on the above method that improves the mentioned factors simultaneously to an acceptable limit. The result of the simulation confirms the correctness of the claim of the proposed method.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes AutomatisésSame topicPhotovoltaic System Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207