MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412528352 · doi:10.3390/electronics14142916

A Comparative Study of Dimensionality Reduction Methods for Accurate and Efficient Inverter Fault Detection in Grid-Connected Solar Photovoltaic Systems

2025· article· en· W4412528352 on OpenAlexaff
Shahid Tufail, Arif I. Sarwat

Bibliographic record

VenueElectronics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicPhotovoltaic System Optimization Techniques
Canadian institutionsNexen (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotovoltaic systemReduction (mathematics)InverterGridDimensionality reductionComputer scienceFault detection and isolationFault (geology)Electronic engineeringEngineeringElectrical engineeringArtificial intelligenceMathematicsVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The continuous, effective operation of grid-connected photovoltaic (GCPV) systems depends on dependable inverter failure detection. Early, precise fault diagnosis improves general system dependability, lowers maintenance costs, and saves downtime. Although computing efficiency remains a difficulty, particularly in resource-limited contexts, machine learning-based fault detection presents interesting prospects in accuracy and responsiveness. By streamlining data complexity and allowing faster and more effective fault diagnosis, dimensionality reduction methods play vital role. Using dimensionality reduction and ML techniques, this work explores inverter fault detection in GCPV systems. Photovoltaic inverter operational data was normalized and preprocessed. In the next step, dimensionality reduction using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and autoencoder-based feature extraction were explored. For ML training four classifiers which include Random Forest (RF), logistic regression (LR), decision tree (DT), and K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN) were used. Trained on the whole standardized dataset, the RF model routinely produced the greatest accuracy of 99.87%, so efficiently capturing complicated feature interactions but requiring large processing resources and time of 36.47sec. LR model showed reduction in accuracy, but very fast training time compared to other models. Further, PCA greatly lowered computing demands, especially improving inference speed for LR and KNN. High accuracy of 99.23% across all models was maintained by autoencoder-derived features.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectronicsSame topicPhotovoltaic System Optimization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207