Enhancing MPPT Performance in Partially Shaded PV Systems under Sensor Malfunctioning with Fuzzy Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The shift towards sustainable energy sources is gaining momentum due to their environmental cleanliness, abundant availability, and eco-friendly characteristics. Solar energy, specifically harnessed through photovoltaic (PV) systems, emerges as a clean, abundant, and environmentally friendly alternative. However, the efficacy of PV systems is subjective depending on two critical factors: irradiance and temperature. To optimize power output, maximum power point tracking (MPPT) strategies are essential, allowing operation at the system’s optimal point. In the presence of partial shading, the power–voltage curve exhibits multiple peaks, yet only one global maximum power point (GMPP) can be identified. Existing algorithms for GMPP tracking often encounter challenges, including overshooting during transient periods and chattering during steady states. This study proposes the utilization of fuzzy sliding mode controllers (FSMC) and fuzzy proportional-integral (FPI) control to enhance global MPPT reference tracking under partial shading conditions. Additionally, the system’s performance is evaluated considering potential sensor malfunctions. The proposed techniques ensure precise tracking of the reference voltage and maximum power in partial shading scenarios, facilitating rapid convergence, improved system stability during transitions, and reduced chattering during steady states. The usefulness of the proposed scheme is confirmed through the use of performance indices. FSMC has the lowest integral absolute error (IAE) of 946.94, followed closely by FPI (947.21), in comparison to the sliding mode controller (SMC) (1241.6) and perturb and observe (P&O) (2433.1). Similarly, in integral time absolute error (ITAE), FSMC (56.84) and FPI (57.06) excel over SMC (91.03) and P&O (635.50).
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".