2023
DOI: 10.1049/rpg2.12755
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fault diagnosis of photovoltaic strings by using machine learning‐based stacking classifier

Bo Liu,
Kai Sun,
Xiaoyu Wang
et al.

Abstract: Photovoltaic (PV) modules are prone to short circuits, open circuits, cracks, which can bring serious harmful effects. It is difficult to establish the corresponding PV fault models to diagnose the status of PV strings. The paper proposes a machine learning‐based stacking classifier (MLSC) for accurate fault diagnosis of PV strings. Specifically, for the operating state of PV modules, the parameter sensitivity algorithm is used to analyze the impact of characteristic factors on the characteristics of PV module… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
0
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 41 publications
0
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) are frequently adopted due to their high accuracy (100%), with several studies applying them for detecting a range of PV panel faults [39][40][41]. Additionally, hybrid models such as ensemble learning and stacking classifiers also reported significant accuracy enhancements [42,43]. Regarding speed and efficiency, the CNN approach in one study was particularly emphasized for its rapid fault identification [41].…”
Section: Comparison Of Techniquesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) are frequently adopted due to their high accuracy (100%), with several studies applying them for detecting a range of PV panel faults [39][40][41]. Additionally, hybrid models such as ensemble learning and stacking classifiers also reported significant accuracy enhancements [42,43]. Regarding speed and efficiency, the CNN approach in one study was particularly emphasized for its rapid fault identification [41].…”
Section: Comparison Of Techniquesmentioning
confidence: 99%