Prediction of Photovoltaic Power by ANN Based on Various Environmental Factors in India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extreme weather conditions, which affect photovoltaic output power, can have a major impact on electricity generated by PV systems. In India, an annual PV power density of 2000kWh/m-2 may be used. Renewable energy (RE) is expected to play a rising part in the nations in coming years. The sun’s radiation is the primary source of renewable energy (RE). With the objective of predicting PV output power with the least amount of error in mind, it is vital to analyse the impact of major environmental parameters on it. The researchers looked at a variety of environmental factors in this study, including irradiance, humidity levels, meteorological conditions, wind velocity, PV global temperature and dust deposition. Countries such as India would gain immensely from this since it will increase the quantity of PV power generated in their national networks. ANN-based prediction models and multiple regression models were used to predict PV system hourly power output. There were three ANN models that predicted PV output power with RMSEs of 2.1436, 6.1555, and 5.3551, respectively, utilising all features using the correlation feature selection (CFS) or relief feature selection (ReliefF) approaches. It is possible to reduce bias to enhance accuracy by employing two distinct bias calculation methodologies, which were applied in this study. For example, the ANN model outperforms linear regression, M5P decision trees and GAUSSIAN process regression (GPR) models in terms of performance.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".