MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimal Remote control of FOPID based Adaptive DMOA for Solar PV Water Pumping System

2025· preprint· en· W4408348534 on OpenAlexaff
Pratibha Chavan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIoT-based Smart Home Systems
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoltaic systemWater pumpingEnvironmental scienceControl (management)Control theory (sociology)Computer scienceEngineeringElectrical engineeringMechanical engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Solar water pumping systems are a crucial application of renewable energy, especially in rural areas where traditional electricity infrastructure may be limited or nonexistent. These systems utilize solar energy to drive water pumps, offering a sustainable and economical solution for water provision. Remote controllers further enhance the convenience and efficiency of solar water pumping systems by enabling remote monitoring and control. This article introduces a solar water pumping system that incorporates an optimized Fractional-Order Proportional-Integral-Derivative (FOPID) controller. By fine-tuning the FOPID parameters, the system can achieve superior performance and reliability, making it well-suited for operation under diverse environmental conditions. The photovoltaic (PV) panel data is transmitted to a remote controller via the Internet of Things (IoT). The remote controller employs the Adaptive Weighted Dwarf Mongoose Optimization Algorithm (ADMOA) to optimize the and parameters of the FOPID controller of solar PV panel. These optimized parameters are then transmitted to the FOPID controller to ensure optimal operation of the solar water pumping system. To evaluate the effectiveness of the ADMOA method, it was compared to traditional trial-and-error tuning methods based on output power, stator current, rotor speed dynamics, and torque. Thus, the simulated findings consistently reveal the superiority of the ADMOA algorithm in terms of convergence analysis and solution quality compared to other reported techniques.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIoT-based Smart Home SystemsFrench-language works237,207