MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211038345 · doi:10.3390/math10030529

Fuzzy-Logic-Based Comparative Analysis of Different Maximum Power Point Tracking Controllers for Hybrid Renewal Energy Systems

2022· article· en· W4211038345 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueMathematics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicPhotovoltaic System Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersKing Saud University
KeywordsMaximum power point trackingHybrid systemHybrid powerPhotovoltaic systemControl theory (sociology)Controller (irrigation)Renewable energyMaximum power principleComputer scienceElectric power systemFuzzy logicPower (physics)EngineeringElectrical engineeringControl (management)PhysicsBiologyInverterArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is an increasing demand for power production day by day all over the globe; thus, hybrid frameworks have an essential role in producing sufficient power for the desirable load due to increasing power demand. The proposed hybrid renewable energy (HRE) systems are used to provide power in different areas to conquer the intermittence of wind and solar resources. The HRE system incorporates more than one renewable energy (RE) system. In this research article, the optimum power generation of different combinations of RE using different Maximum Power Point Tracking (MPPT) control methods is presented. The Fuel Cell (FC), FC–Photovoltaic (PV), FC–Wind (W), and FC–PV–W systems are developed to examine different MPPT controllers. The results show that the FC–PV–W HRE system produces the maximum power as compared to the FC, FC–PV, and FC–W systems. The FC–PV–W HRE system produces increased power compared to 94.24% from the FC system, 37.17% from the FC–PV hybrid system, and 15.8% from the FC–W hybrid framework with a Perturb and Observe (P&O) controller and, similarly, 74.57% from the FC system, 10.3% from the FC-PV hybrid system, and 31.64% from the FC-W hybrid system using a fuzzy logic (FL) controller, indicating that the best combination is the FC-PV-W hybrid system using an FL controller, which is useful for maximum power generation with reduced oscillations.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.954
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
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.238 · 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