MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of Snow Depth on Single-Axis Tracked Bifacial Photovoltaic System Performance

2022· article· en· W4312528224 on OpenAlexaffabout
Annie C. J. Russell, Christopher E. Valdivia, Joan E. Haysom, Karin Hinzer

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE 49th Photovoltaics Specialists Conference (PVSC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSolar Radiation and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSnowLatitudePhotovoltaic systemYield (engineering)Snow removalEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyPhysicsElectrical engineeringEngineeringGeographyGeodesy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photovoltaic (PV) capacity is rapidly expanding in mid-to-high latitude jurisdictions due to drastic decreases in PV system cost and global decarbonization efforts. However, uncertainty around performance impacts of latitude-specific conditions, such as ground-accumulated snow, contribute to investment risk. In this work, we employed DUET, our custom bifacial PV modelling tool, to study variable ground clearance resulting from snow accumulation. We model the impact of snow depth on a module in four generic, 2-in-portait single-axis tracked (SAT) systems with baseline ground clearances ranging from 1.6-2.8 m. Over the snowy season in Ottawa, Ontario$(\boldsymbol{45}^{\circ}\mathbf{N})$and Cambridge Bay, Nunavut$(\boldsymbol{69}^{\circ}\mathbf{N})$, Canada, rear insolation and energy yield decrease by 3.4-9.6% and 0.36-0.69%, respectively - comparable to annual structure shading and electrical mismatch loss factors. The average daily energy yield loss in both locations is 0.034%per centimeter of accumulated snow. When hourly energy yield loss throughout the snowy season is binned by hour of day, hourly averages peak at 1.2-1.4% loss, suggesting implications for real-time and short-term forecasting.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.138
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE 49th Photovoltaics Specialists Conference (PVSC)Same topicSolar Radiation and PhotovoltaicsFrench-language works237,207