MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214807822 · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3156942

A Review of Machine Learning-Based Photovoltaic Output Power Forecasting: Nordic Context

2022· review· en· W4214807822 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Berhane Darsene Dimd, Steve Völler, Ümit Cali, Ole‐Morten Midtgård

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSolar Radiation and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNorges Teknisk-Naturvitenskapelige Universitet
KeywordsComputer sciencePhotovoltaic systemContext (archaeology)Power (physics)Artificial intelligenceMachine learningElectrical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Motivated by factors such as the reduction in cost and the need for a shift towards achieving UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, PV (Photovoltaic) power generation is getting more attention in the cold regions of the Nordic countries and Canada. The cold climate and the albedo effect of snow in these regions present favorable operating conditions for PV cells and an opportunity to realize the seasonal matching of generation and consumption respectively. However, the erratic nature of PV brings a threat to the operation of the grid. PV power forecasting has been used as an economical solution to minimize and even overcome this limitation. This paper is therefore a comprehensive review of machine learning-based PV output power forecasting models in the literature in the context of Nordic climate. The impact of meteorological parameters and the soiling effect due to snow, which is unique to this climate, on the performance of a prediction model is discussed. PV power forecasting models in the literature are systematically classified into multiple groups and each group is analyzed and important suggestions are made for choosing a better model for these regions. Ensemble methods, optimization algorithms, time-series decomposition, and weather clustering are identified as important techniques that can be used to enhance performance. And notably, this work proposed two conceptual approaches that can be used to incorporate the effect of snow on PV power forecasting. Future research needs to focus on this area, which is crucial for the development of PV in these regions.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations65
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicSolar Radiation and PhotovoltaicsFrench-language works237,207