MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297372081 · doi:10.18280/jesa.550401

Optimization of Fractional Order PI Controller by PSO Algorithm Applied to a Grid-Connected Photovoltaic System

2022· article· en· W4297372081 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nacer Bouderres, Djallel Kerdoun, Abdelhak Djellad, Sofiane Chiheb, Azzeddine Dekhane

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrogrid Control and Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoltaic systemPID controllerParticle swarm optimizationControl theory (sociology)Robustness (evolution)GridController (irrigation)Computer scienceTotal harmonic distortionElectric power systemVoltageAlgorithmMathematicsPower (physics)EngineeringControl engineeringTemperature controlPhysicsControl (management)Electrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the increasing integration of renewable energies into power grids, their control and power quality are becoming the main focus of many research efforts. In a grid-connected photovoltaic system, the control strategy is necessary to efficiently use the solar energy as well as to ensure high power quality. This paper presents a study on the robustness of a Fractional Order PI controller based on the Particle Swarm Optimization algorithm (PSO-FOPI) in a grid-connected PV system. The controller used was integrated into the inverter to apply voltage-oriented control (VOC). Fractional order controllers have an additional degree of freedom, so that a wider range of parameters is available to provide better control. Parameter optimization of the FOPI and classical PI controllers are performed using the PSO algorithm. The performance of the FOPI controller is compared with that of the classical PI controller. A complete study of the behavior of the grid connected PV system is tested using MATLAB/Simulink. The simulation results show the performance and efficiency of the PSO-FOPI controller compared to the classical PI controller in terms of rapidity, stability and precision, as well as the THD reduction of the current injected to the grid for any variation of solar irradiance.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes AutomatisésSame topicMicrogrid Control and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207