MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408540338 · doi:10.1109/tim.2025.3551857

Improved Butterfly Optimization Algorithm for Parameter Identification of Various Photovoltaic Models Including Power Station

2025· article· en· W4408540338 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicPower Systems and Renewable Energy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersScientific Research Fund of Liaoning Provincial Education Department
KeywordsPhotovoltaic systemComputer scienceIdentification (biology)Optimization algorithmAlgorithmPower (physics)EngineeringElectrical engineeringMathematical optimizationMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Parameter identification of photovoltaic models (PIPM) is essential for controlling a photovoltaic (PV) system. However, due to its complexity, most existing methods still suffer from problems such as low accuracy, sensitivity to initial values, and local optima. For this, an improved butterfly optimization algorithm (DLBOA) with dimension differential learning is proposed. First, a new adaptive fragrance is introduced to optimize the instability caused by target differences and improve convergence performance. Second, the proposed dimension differential learning strategy improves butterflies’ position by utilizing the excellent dimension information within the population, thereby reinforcing interindividual learning and enhancing population balancing and diversity, ultimately escaping from local optima. Then, after evaluating based on CEC2022, DLBOA identified the parameters for eight models across five materials and outperformed nine state-of-the-art algorithms in terms of accuracy, robustness, and promoting percentage. DLBOA is further compared with nine existing PIPM methods including five numerical methods. Finally, applying DLBOA to the YL PV station in China Guizhou Power Grid under a dynamic climate, multiple metrics confirm DLBOA’s outstanding accuracy, with the reconstructed I-V and P-V curves closely matching synthesized curves. The statistical analysis results demonstrate that the proposed method effectively enhances the robustness of parameter identification while also strengthening the ability to escape local optima, demonstrating the potential to improve PIPM accuracy.

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.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.678

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.231 · 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