MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deep reinforcement learning approach for hybrid renewable energy systems optimization

2025· article· en· W4412470246 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

VenueEngineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSmart Grid Energy Management
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceReinforcement learningRenewable energyArtificial intelligenceMachine learningElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The sizing of hybrid renewable energy systems (HRES) is a major challenge faced in contemporary energy research. The optimal configuration based on the specific consumption requirements is essential for strategic energy planning. Effective sizing must balance the investment costs, reliability, environmental impacts, and greenhouse gas emissions while satisfying the expected energy requirements. This study proposes a novel multi-criteria sizing approach based on deep reinforcement learning (DRL). The DRL agent is guided by a reward function that integrates three essential performance metrics: energy cost (LCOE), renewable energy fraction (REF), and the loss of power supply probability (LPSP). A penalty function is also included to consider the reliance on external sources, such as diesel generators and the public grid, promoting greater autonomy and renewable usage. The DRL-based approach was implemented and tested on three distinct demand profiles, using hourly data for one year. A comparative analysis was conducted against three established methods: particle swarm optimization (PSO), multi-objective PSO (MOPSO), and non-dominated sorted genetic algorithm (NSGA-II). The results indicate that DRL significantly outperforms all the benchmark methods in terms of economic efficiency. DRL achieves a significant reduction in the energy costs, ranging from 21.33 % to 30.09 % when compared with PSO, 27.89 %–30.27 % when compared with MOPSO, and 27.63 %–28.47 % when compared with NSGA-II. These findings demonstrate that DRL presents a robust and adaptive framework for the sizing and operational control of HRES. DRL presents more autonomous, cost-effective, and scalable renewable energy solutions by minimizing the energy costs while maintaining the system reliability.

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 score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score0.821

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.217
Teacher spread0.206 · 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