MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401604522 · doi:10.1016/j.ifacol.2024.07.529

An Analytic Hierarchy Process based approach for assessing the performance of photovoltaic solar power plants

2024· article· en· W4401604522 on OpenAlexaff
Meryam Chafiq, Loubna Benabbou, Hanane Dagdougui, Ismail Belhaj, Abdelali Djdiaa, Hicham Bouzekri, Abdelaziz Berrado

Bibliographic record

VenueIFAC-PapersOnLine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSolar Radiation and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoltaic systemAnalytic hierarchy processProcess (computing)Power (physics)HierarchyComputer scienceSystems engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineeringOperations researchPhysicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The key performance indicators are crucial for monitoring the performance of photovoltaic solar plants, thus significantly enhancing their overall efficiency. This critical role underscores the importance of making informed decisions regarding the evaluation criteria of these indicators, which would streamline the PV installations evaluation process. Despite the significant importance of this role, the weighting and prioritization of KPI selection criteria in the specific field of solar plants have not been addressed in the literature. The article aims to address this gap by developing a methodology that identifies the most relevant aspects for evaluating the performance of photovoltaic plants, while taking into account specific needs and evaluation contexts, integrating a hierarchical decomposition tree of criteria, which serves as a framework to guide criterion prioritization through collaborative weighting with the thematic team. This methodology incorporates the Analytic Hierarchy Process, a multicriteria analysis approach designed to assist decision-makers in addressing their specific needs, ensuring optimal alignment with the characteristics of the optimization problem, whether it involves single or multiple objectives.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.582

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIFAC-PapersOnLineSame topicSolar Radiation and PhotovoltaicsFrench-language works237,207