MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410859125 · doi:10.1016/j.solener.2025.113623

Integrated deep learning and image processing method for modeling energy loss due to shadows in solar arrays

2025· article· en· W4410859125 on OpenAlexaff
Mohamad T. Araji, Ali Waqas

Bibliographic record

VenueSolar Energy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicPhotovoltaic System Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolar energyImage processingComputer scienceImage (mathematics)Energy (signal processing)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionRemote sensingEnvironmental scienceGeologyElectrical engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Shading poses a serious challenge to photovoltaic (PV) systems power generation, causing energy losses of up to 40 %, leading to power mismatches, hotspot formation, and accelerated module degradation. Accurate modelling and simulation of shading are critical for improving photovoltaic (PV) performance. This study develops two shadow‑detection pipelines: (i) the Classic Hough Transform (CHT) combined with K‑means segmentation and (ii) a new Deep Hough Transform (DHT) that learns semantic line features without the need for PV‑specific training data. A 1-kilowatt capacity solar array with planned shading devices was developed and used to perform the experimental analysis. The proposed methodology achieved an accuracy of 0.85, indicating a 32.81 % improvement in solar array detection compared to CHT methods. Computed energy losses due to shading were within 0.5 % to 1.9 % of System Advisor Model (SAM’s) simulated losses. Evaluation with transient shadows from a pedestrian, vehicle, and cloud showed an average mIoU of 81.8 % highlighting the methods advantage over existing 3D modeling-based simulation software. Statistical analysis confirmed the method’s consistency, yielding Dice = 0.857 (95 % CI 0.728–0.943) and mIoU = 0.771 (CI 0.595–0.893). The parametric analysis highlighted the time of day and number of obstructions as key factors influencing shading on solar arrays, with mornings and evenings experiencing over 6 % shading loss variations. Overall, this integrated approach develops robust, real-time modelling and simulation for optimizing large solar energy systems.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.570
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.268 · 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
GenreMethods

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 venueSolar EnergySame topicPhotovoltaic System Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207