MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416654337 · doi:10.1016/j.egyr.2025.11.052

Experimental evaluation and climate-based feasibility of thermoelectric energy harvesting in PVT systems

2025· article· en· W4416654337 on OpenAlexaff
Hobyung Chae, Yujin Nam

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicAdvanced Thermoelectric Materials and Devices
Canadian institutionsNexen (Canada)
FundersMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaNational Research Foundation of KoreaMinistry of Education
KeywordsEnergy harvestingThermoelectric effectThermoelectric generatorEnergy (signal processing)Thermoelectric coolingWork (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study evaluates the feasibility of integrating thermoelectric generators (TEGs) with photovoltaic-thermal (PVT) systems to enhance power generation and heat recovery. A laboratory-scale prototype was developed, and an approximation equation was derived based on temperature differential and flow rate to estimate the TEG power output. In the first experiment, TEG performance was assessed under varying surface temperatures. At a temperature difference of 30 °C between the hot and cold sides, a 55 × 55 mm TEG module generated 0.74 V and 0.37 A, yielding a power output of 0.3 W. Under an irradiance of 1000 W/m², the PVT-TEG module exhibited a temperature difference of 1.9 K, generating power outputs of 0.96–0.98 W from the PV panel, 0.006 W from the TEG, and 15 W of additional heat recovery. Furthermore, a TRNSYS18-based simulation was used to analyze the PVT-TEG system performance across six climate zones, revealing significant energy output variations. Cairo, characterized by high solar radiation and large diurnal temperature fluctuations, recorded the highest power generation (PVT: 265 kWh/(m²·yr), TEG: 48.5 kWh/(m²·yr)). The results highlight a strong correlation between climatic conditions and system performance, demonstrating that variations in solar radiation and temperature gradients significantly impact energy output.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.280 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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 venueEnergy ReportsSame topicAdvanced Thermoelectric Materials and DevicesFrench-language works237,207