MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409605012 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-287

Module Efficiency Improvement Method Based on Gray Wolf Optimization Algorithm in Intelligent Management Environment of Photovoltaic Power Plants

2025· article· en· W4409605012 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicPower Systems and Renewable Energy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoltaic systemGray (unit)Computer scienceOptimization algorithmPower (physics)AlgorithmEngineeringMathematical optimizationElectrical engineeringMathematicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the gradual depletion of fossil energy resources and the increasingly severe environmental problems, photovoltaic power generation as a typical new energy industry has been highly favored in recent years.In the face of the low efficiency of components often faced by photovoltaic power plants in actual operation, this paper proposes a maximum power point tracking algorithm (IGWO) based on the Gray Wolf optimization algorithm, which optimizes and joins the dynamic weights to expand the search range of the algorithm, and improves the efficiency of solar energy utilization.The gray wolf algorithm is further applied to the optimization of photovoltaic (PV) arrays in power stations, and a PV array reconfiguration algorithm based on the gray wolf optimization algorithm is proposed to randomly generate a radial structure by the broken circle method, and the best reconfiguration scheme is obtained through iterative optimization search.The optimization experiment of photovoltaic power station was carried out, and the photovoltaic array reconstruction algorithm in this paper was used to reconstruct in the static shadow occlusion mode, and the GMPP after reconstruction was significantly improved, and the shadow occlusion mode was increased to 14515.565W,10626.844W,and 10636.467W,respectively, and the tracking accuracy of the IGWO algorithm in this paper also reached 99.9%, 99.5%, and 99.6%, respectively.The tracking accuracy of the IGWO algorithm in this paper for MPPT tracking control is consistently above 99% level under dynamic shadow shading mode.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.228 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicPower Systems and Renewable EnergyFrench-language works237,207