Energy Reports 11 (2024) 1910–1924

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy Reports
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/egyr

Research Paper

DPGS: Data-driven photovoltaic grid-connected system exploiting deep

learning and two-stage single-phase inverter
Luyu Tian a, Chaoyu Dong b, *, Yunfei Mu a, Hongjie Jia a
a
School of Electrical and Information Engineering, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China
b
Agency for Science, Technology and Research, Nanyang Technological University, 639798, Singapore

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The increasing demand for clean energy to address the looming energy crisis has led to the widespread use of
Data-driven photovoltaic-grid systems (DPGS) photovoltaic grid-connected technology, particularly in microgrids. To fully harness solar energy, this study
Maximum power point tracking (MPPT) proposes a data-driven strategy for photovoltaic maximum power point tracking with adaptive adjustment to
Online tracking
environmental dynamics. Exploiting deep learning and incremental adjustment, our data-driven photovoltaic-
Deep learning
grid systems (DPGS) upgrade the traditional perturbation and observation (P&O) MPPT to a dynamic evolu­
Two-stage single-phase inverter
tionary scheme. DPGS gathers the photovoltaic panel’s output voltage and current, calculates the current power,
and then outputs the appropriate reference voltage based on the power difference. The photovoltaic voltage is
then adjusted using a data-driven strategy. In this study, a double-hidden layer deep learning network is utilized
to output the prediction control signal of the first-stage circuit while continuously modifying the weight matrix
and optimizing the tracking parameters of DPGS. Besides, a two-stage single-phase grid-connected photovoltaic
inverter is designed to handle environmental dynamics. The simulation results validate the reliability of our
suggested DPGS. DPGS often responds within 0.4 s, which is 33 % faster than conventional P&O techniques.
DPGS has a power ripple rate that is approximately 78 % greater than conventional P&O approaches, at 0.022 %.
DPGS has a quicker response time and less power fluctuation under external interference than traditional P&O
MPPT. Our study contributes to the efficiency and reliability enhancement of grid-connected photovoltaic sys­
tems and has wide application in renewable energy systems.

flexibility, a large quantity, and diversity (Hirsch et al., 2018) of the

distributed power supply, which can effectively provide a reliable sup­
1. Introduction
ply of various energy forms to meet demand. Microgrids are widely used
to electrify remote locations and islands (Dong et al., 2023), benefitting
In present times, reliance on non-renewable fossil fuels such as coal,
individuals who lack access to electricity (Nosratabadi et al., 2017).
oil, and natural gas persists as a significant proportion of global energy
Therefore, the study of microgrids can aid significantly in the transition
consumption (Wang et al., 2020). However, the depletion of such fuels,
from traditional power grids to smart grids.
along with the continuous growth of the world’s population, poses an
The efficiency of photovoltaic power generation is a crucial factor
urgent concern (Zhou et al., 2019). Consequently, increasing attention is
affecting the stability of microgrid systems. Photovoltaic grid-connected
being given to renewable energy production technologies, such as solar
systems use single-phase or three-phase grid-connected inverters to
energy.
convert the direct current generated by photovoltaic series into alter­
In terms of dual-carbon renewable energy sources, wind, tidal, and
nating current that meets the grid requirements (Liu et al., 2019; Mazzeo
solar power are generating an increasing amount of energy annually
et al., 2021). Consistency in the AC power’s frequency, amplitude,
(Shrestha et al., 2022). Microgrids, a type of new energy power gener­
phase, and other characteristics is vital to avoid grid-connected failures.
ation, require little investment (Williams et al., 2015), offer significant
In China, the permitted frequency range for photovoltaic grid-connected
environmental protection (Gutierrez-Oliva et al., 2022), and provide
systems is 50 ± 0.5 Hz, the permitted deviation of single-phase voltage
high flexibility (Bajwa et al., 2019). As a result, microgrids are
is ± 7 %, and the harmonic content of the total grid-connected current
increasingly being established as an effective format for renewable en­
should be less than 5 % of the output (Cabrera-Tobar et al., 2016).
ergy penetration. Additionally, microgrid technology allows for

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: tianluyu@tju.edu.cn (L. Tian), dong0120@e.ntu.edu.sg (C. Dong), yunfeimu@tju.edu.cn (Y. Mu), hjjia@tju.edu.cn (H. Jia).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2024.01.038
Received 4 June 2023; Received in revised form 2 November 2023; Accepted 16 January 2024
Available online 30 January 2024
2352-4847/© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
L. Tian et al. Energy Reports 11 (2024) 1910–1924

Nomenclature f (2) (⋅) the activation function of the hidden layer 2

f (3) (⋅) the activation function of the output layer
Abbreviations
PV photovoltaic Variables
MPPT maximum power point tracking ugs control the PWM signal in the boost circuit
DPGS data-driven photovoltaic system VDC DC bus voltage
ANN artificial neural network VPV photovoltaic voltage
BPNN backpropagation neural network uAB inverting voltage
DL deep learning ug grid voltage
P&O perturbation and observation r the input signal of the controller
PID proportion integration differentiation y(⋅) output response
DL-PID deep learning PID controller e(⋅) feedback deviation
PWM pulse width modulation u(⋅) control variable
PLL phase-locked loop I input vector
d(⋅) current expected response
Parameters and constants
xout,i (k), x(i) the i-th element of the input vector I
(1)
kp, ki, kd proportion parameter of PID, integration parameter of PID,
vj1 (k) the j1-th input of current hidden layer 1
(1)
differentiation parameter of PID
W(1) weight coefficient matrix of hidden layer 1 vj2 (k)
(2)
the j2-th input of current hidden layer 1
W(2) weight coefficient matrix of hidden layer 2
vh (k) the input of the h-th neuron in the current output layer
(3)
W(3) weight coefficient matrix of the output layer
E(k) the root mean square error, selected as the optimization
α forgetting factor in neural network
objective function
μ learning rate in neural network
VOC PV open-circuit voltage
ΔP power variation
ISC PV short-circuit current
i number of input elements of the input layer
Iinv Inverter current
j1 number of input elements of hidden layer 1
j2 number of input elements of hidden layer 2 Sets and indices
h number of input elements of the output layer t index of time
Q IGBT tube power index of output power
D PWM duty ratio k sampling frequency
f (1) (⋅) the activation function of the hidden layer 1

Although the efficiency of photovoltaic inverters can reach around 98 %
(Chen et al., 2012), the current photoelectric conversion efficiency of
commercial photovoltaic panels is typically less than 20 % (Razykov
et al., 2011). This is mainly due to material constraints of mono­
crystalline silicon or polycrystalline silicon solar panels that result in low
photoelectric conversion efficiency, thereby reducing photovoltaic
panel efficiency (Yun, 2017). Therefore, photovoltaic power generation
must be equipped with MPPT maximum power point tracking to
improve power generation efficiency. MPPT control technology uses
power tracking to acquire the best energy, enabling photovoltaic panels
to adapt to changes in environmental factors (Inthamoussou et al.,
2012). Various MPPT algorithms have been examined so far, including
the simple-to-implement perturbation and observation (P&O) algorithm
(Saravanan and Babu, 2016), the incremental conductance algorithm
(Aldair et al., 2018), fuzzy logic control (Yap et al., 2020), and other new
techniques (Bendib et al., 2015). For instance, to manage the maximum
power of solar under shadow conditions, some studies utilize particle
swarm optimization (PSO) in conjunction with the disturbance moni­
toring approach (Lian et al., 2014). However, the conventional
grid-connected photovoltaic control algorithm has fixed parameters and
a limited capacity to respond to environmental dynamics. To increase
the accuracy of MPP collection, numerous research studies have inte­
grated MPPT algorithms with machine learning techniques.
Machine learning algorithms have distinct advantages, making them
frequently used in photovoltaic power-generating control. Artificial
neural networks, in particular, stand out among other approaches due to
their ability to determine the relationship between various factors
without relying on complex mathematical models, allowing for a more
accurate determination (Li et al., 2022). Moreover, artificial neural
networks offer off-line training, nonlinear coupling, and high-speed
response advantages (Dong et al., 2021). They are widely employed in
photovoltaic fault diagnosis (Yuan et al., 2022), photovoltaic power
prediction (Ferrero Bermejo et al., 2019), grid connection control of
photovoltaic power generation (Aref et al., 2023), and MPPT manage­
ment of photovoltaic maximum power point tracking in solar
grid-connected systems (Kermadi and Berkouk, 2017). Many studies use
machine learning techniques to coordinate PV grid-connected systems
(Lim and Yoon, 2022). For instance, a literature review presented an
MPPT method of ANN combined incremental conductance method (Lee
et al., 2010), which accurately searched the maximum power based on
feedback voltage and current to approach the maximum power point
quickly. Combining various PID controllers with machine learning
techniques serves to improve the performance of the controller itself.
Artificial intelligence algorithms are also used to enhance the
grid-connected current from photovoltaic systems connected to the grid.
In the literature, a single-phase LCL photovoltaic grid-connected system
was built, and a neural network was employed to improve both the
photovoltaic grid-connected waveform and the grid-connected PID
controller (Qu, 2022). In addition, a PID controller for the DC-AC con­
verter’s efficiency increase was designed, which enhanced the
grid-connected photovoltaic side’s performance (Lakshmi and Reddy,
2022). At the same time, data-driven involves collecting and analyzing
data (Bertsimas et al., 2018), allowing the model to adjust according to
different data (Montans et al., 2019). In addition, data-driven requires a
large amount of data to adjust the model or model parameters, which
greatly reduces the system’s dependence on the model and makes it
more suitable for different scenarios (Silva et al., 2018).
Fig. 1 shows the closed-loop regulation of voltage in MPPT control.
There have been several studies focusing on improving the PID
controller for MPPT in solar energy systems. For example, (Harrag and
Messalti, 2015) used a genetic algorithm (GA) to adjust PID parameters
and change the step size of P&O (Sibtain et al., 2021). proposed a

1911
L. Tian et al. Energy Reports 11 (2024) 1910–1924

Fig. 1. Closed loop adjustment of output voltage in MPPT.

Fig. 2. Complete schematic diagram of the photovoltaic grid-connected system with DPGS.

fractional PID controller for both photovoltaic and wind power systems.
In (Yang et al., 2018a), (Thangam and Muthuvel, 2022), and (Yang
et al., 2018b), passive fractional controllers were designed, with each
adopting different meta-heuristic algorithms to update parameter
values. In addition, since passive PID does not require current to
participate in regulation, additional overcurrent protection devices may
be needed for the photovoltaic system. Many studies have also explored
fuzzy control strategies for MPPT. For instance, (Chouksey et al., 2020)
created a fuzzy PID controller based on adaptive gain scheduling and
used an improved artificial neural network-based particle swarm opti­
mization approach to reduce steady-state error and achieve system
stability. In Yang et al. (2018c) a fractional sliding mode controller was
designed specifically for inaccurate photovoltaic grid-connected systems
that complete MPPT without relying on precise PV models. Despite these
advances, there are not many matching PID controllers that can
extremely efficiently and economically achieve closed-loop control of
the voltage at the MPP, especially in the event of extreme environmental
changes to achieve adaptive adjustment. Additional research is neces­
sary to address this gap in the existing literature.
To enhance the effectiveness of photovoltaic maximum power
tracking, this study proposes a data-driven photovoltaic grid-connected
system that combines deep learning with photovoltaic grid-connected
control. The aim is to tackle the aforementioned challenges. This strat­
egy can be seamlessly integrated with photovoltaic grid-connected

1912
L. Tian et al.
Fig. 3. First-stage circuit of grid-connected photovoltaic inverter.
Fig. 4. Second-stage circuit: T-type inverter and LCL filter topology.
MPPT control. The following outlines the key contributions of this
paper:
1. A two-stage single-phase photovoltaic grid-connected system that
incorporates deep learning. By doing so, a data-driven grid-con­
nected system is developed;
2. A novel approach that combines deep learning and PID controller is
proposed, wherein the improved PID controller is designed using a
deep neural network structure. This controller is capable of adjusting
PID parameters adaptively for photovoltaic grid-connected systems,
accounting for changes in environmental factors and achieving ac­
curate MPPT regulation;
3. To verify the effectiveness of the proposed strategy, a single-phase
photovoltaic grid-connected system was built, and the system was
tested in various environments. A comparison of test results led to
conclusions on the system’s performance.
Fig. 2 illustrates the structure of the entire DPGS. In this paper, the
deep learning method is utilized to improve conventional photovoltaic
PID by realizing the following advantages in variable environments:
1913
Energy Reports 11 (2024) 1910–1924
1. Online regulation in MPPT control;
2. Self-adjustment of DPGS parameters;
3. Adaptability for variable environment.
The main structure of the rest part of this paper is as follows: Section
2 introduces the construction of a two-stage single-phase photovoltaic
grid-connected system and related device parameters; Section 3 in­
troduces the design of DPGS; Section 4 introduces the control algorithm.
The simulation platform is constructed and tested in Section 5. Section 6
draws the conclusion.
2. Photovoltaic inverter model
In this paper, we aim to test the effectiveness of the proposed MPPT
strategy enhanced by deep-BPNN as an auxiliary system. To achieve
this, we constructed a two-stage single-phase grid-connected photo­
voltaic inverter model. The first-stage utilized the boost circuit to
manage the MPPT control of the photovoltaic panel. In the second-
stage, we selected the T-three-current H-bridge inverter topology to
enhance the inverter waveform and minimize switching stress. Fig. 3
L. Tian et al.
Fig. 5. Conduction control signal of IGBT tubes Q1~Q6 in three-level inverters.
Fig. 6. Structure of BPNN model.
Fig. 7. Structure of improved DL-PID controller.
shows the topology of the first-stage boost circuit.
2.1. Design of the first-stage boost circuit
The DC power produced by the PV array undergoes a two-stage
process before being converted into AC power. First, it passes through
the boost circuit of the initial stage, after which it enters the inverter
circuit of the second-stage for DC-AC conversion. The improved MPPT is
responsible for controlling the boost circuit. This ensures that the input
voltage of the first-stage is optimized to maintain proximity with the PV
array’s maximum power point voltage value. Simultaneously, the boost
1914
Energy Reports 11 (2024) 1910–1924
circuit generates the DC bus voltage required to raise the solar voltage
for grid connection.
2.2. Design of the second-stage T-three-current H-bridge inverter circuit
The second-stage is responsible for the DC-AC conversion. Prior to
connecting to the power grid, an LCL filter is incorporated to signifi­
cantly reduce harmonics in the AC waveform, minimizing their impact
on the main power grid. The entire circuit topology is depicted in the
Fig. 4.
In comparison to the two-level inverter circuit, the T-three-current
H-bridge inverter is characterized by lower switching losses, reduced
voltage stress on switching devices, and higher overall circuit efficiency
(Arcos-Pardo et al., 2017).
Fig. 5. shows the control signal from Q1 to Q6 during the inverter
process, with the switching frequency set to 18 kHz, and dead time of
5 × 10− 7 s. From Fig. 4. and 5, it can be seen that Q1 and Q4 are one
group of IGBT tubes, while Q2 and Q4 are another group of IGBT tubes.
The continuity of IGBT tubes in the same group is the same. In practice,
bi-directional power switch tubes are not utilized, thus, IGBT tubes Q5
and Q6 are reverse-connected in series to accomplish double conduc­
tion. The T-inverter’s output voltage fluctuates between +VDC, 0, and
-VDC, and the current waveform performs with high efficiency.
3. Composition of DPGS
3.1. Introduction to BPNN
BPNN is able to mapping in multi-dimensional functions and is
widely applied in various control fields. The controller combines the
BPNN approach because the self-adjustment of controller settings can
enable photovoltaic to adapt to various environmental changes and
stabilize the output power more successfully. The BPNN structure in­
cludes an input layer, a hidden layer, and an output layer. The different
layers couple through the weight coefficient matrix, and the neurons in
each layer are used for calculation and processing. Fig. 6. illustrates the
typical structure of BPNN.
The learning process of BPNN can be divided into two stages forward
propagation and reverse error propagation. Prior to initiating the cal­
culations, several factors need to be determined including the learning
rate, number of hidden layers, input and output elements, network
L. Tian et al. Energy Reports 11 (2024) 1910–1924

Fig. 8. Double-layer neural network structure.

structure, and corresponding parameters. Additionally, the activation 3.3. Forward propagation in DPGS
function of each layer and the initial value of the weight coefficient
matrix must be established. In the forward propagation process, the output of the input layer of
the double-layer neural network is:

3.2. Improved PID control of the DL method (1)

xout,i (k) = x(i) (4)

Traditional PID controllers consist of three parameters: kp, ki, and kd. Where, i = 1, 2, 3, 4, is the i-th element of the input vector I.
The control quality of the controller depends on the value of the pa­ The output of the input layer xout,i (k) serves as the input of hidden
(1)

rameters. Manual parameter setting is time-consuming and imprecise.

layer 1. The activation function of hidden layer 1 and hidden layer 2
Therefore, we propose an improved DL-PID controller that can contin­
both choose the hyperbolic tangent S-shaped tanh function:
uously learn and update the weight matrix through deep learning () ()
methods to achieve adaptive modification of kp, ki, and kd parameters. ex − e− x
f (1) ⋅ = f (2) ⋅ = tanh(x) = x (5)
The structure of the improved DL-PID controller is shown in Fig. 7. e + e− x
Adding consideration that increasing the number of hidden layers
Therefore, the input vector of hidden layer 1 is:
enhances the accuracy of network calculation, a two-hidden-layer BPNN
is chosen for the design. The neural network takes the input signal r, the ∑
4

output response y, and the feedback deviation e as input. The ideal kp, ki, v(1)
j1 (k) = w(1) (1) (1)
j1i xout,i = W I (6)
and kd parameters will be output by the DL-PID in accordance based on
i=1

the error performance function.

Where, j1= 1, 2,… 5; vj1 (k)is the j1-th input of current hidden layer 1.
(1)
The control formula of incremental digital PID is shown as follows:
wj1i is the weight coefficient matrix from the i-th neuron to the j1-th
(1)
( ) ( ( ))
u(k) = u k − 1 + kp e(k) − e k − 1 + ki e(k)
( ( ) ( )) (2) neuron in the input layer to the hidden layer 1. The output vector of
+kd e(k) − 2e k − 1 + e k − 2 hidden layer 1 is:
Therefore, the control quantity u(k) is regarded as the multivariate ( )
x(2)
out,j1 (k) = f
(1)
v(1)
j1 (k) (7)
nonlinear function of u(k-1), e(k), e(k-1), e(k-2), and kp, ki, and kd. The
formula is as follows. Similarly, the activation function of hidden layer 2 still chooses the
[ ( ) ( ) ( ) ]
u(k) = f u k − 1 , e(k), e k − 1 , e k − 2 , kp , ki , kd (3) hyperbolic tangent S-shaped tanh function, whose input is:

Therefore, the optimal control law can be obtained through the ∑

5
v(2)
j2 (k) = w(2) (2) (2) (2)
j2j1 xout,j1 = W X (8)
double-layer neural network. j1 =1
The overall structure of BPNN has four layers, which include the
input layer, the hidden layer 1, the hidden layer 2, and the output layer. Where, j2= 1, 2, … 5; vj2 (k)is the j2-th input of the current hidden layer
(2)

The number of input elements is four and the number of neurons in both
2. wj2j1 is the weight coefficient matrix from the j1-th neuron to the j2-th
(2)
hidden layer 1 and hidden layer 2 is five, meanwhile, the number of
output elements is three. The structure is shown in Fig. 8. neuron in the hidden layer 1 to the hidden layer 2.
W(1) is the weight coefficient matrix of the hidden layer 1. W(2) is the The output vector of hidden layer 2 is:
weight coefficient matrix of the hidden layer 2. W(3) is the weight co­ ( )
efficient matrix of the output layer. Furthermore, f (1) (⋅)andf (2) (⋅)are the x(3)
out,j2 (k) = f
(2)
v(2)
j2 (k) (9)
activation function of hidden layer 1 and 2 respectively, whilef (3) (⋅) is Finally, since the parameters in the PID controller cannot be nega­
the activation function of the output layer. tive, the neuron activation function of the output layer selects the non-
The input vector I of the neural network corresponds to the input r, negative Sigmoid function, and the expression is as follows.
output y, deviation e, and system bias at different times of the system
(the value is set to 1). The output vector Y corresponds to the three
parameters kp, ki, and kd of the PID controller respectively.

1915
L. Tian et al. Energy Reports 11 (2024) 1910–1924

Fig. 9. The control structure of DPGS.

()
ex By using the fastest descent method to explore the error surface, the
f (3) ⋅ = (10)
ex + e− x weight matrix at the minimum value of E(k) can be obtained. When the
gradient is zero, the optimal value can be identified. By modifying the
The input of the output layer is:
weight along the negative gradient direction of the surface, the bottom
∑
5 of the error surface can be reached. The gradient formula and specific
(11) calculation formula of the output layer are:
(3) (3) (3)
vh (k) = whj2 xout,j2 = W (3) X (3)
j2
(3) ( )[
∂E(k) ∂E(k) ∂y(k) ∂u(k) ∂xout,h ∂v(3)h (k) y(k) − y(k − 1)
= ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ (3) ⋅ ⋅sgn ⋅ e(k)
Where, h= 1, 2, 3; vh (k)is the input of the h-th neuron in the current
(3)
∂w(3)
hj2
∂y(k) ∂u(k) ∂x(3)
out,h ∂vh ∂w(3) u(k) − u(k − 1)
( ) ( ) hj2 ( )] ( )
output layer. whj2 is the weight coefficient matrix from the j2-th neuron to
(3)

the h-th neuron in the hidden layer 2 to the output layer. − e k − 1 , e(k).e(k) − 2e k − 1 + e k − 2 ⋅f ′(3) v(3) (3)
h (k) ⋅xout,j2

In the end, the DL-PID parameter corresponding to the output of the

(18)
output layer is:
(3)
( ) Therefore, the weight update rule of the output layer is:
(12)
(3) (3)
xout,h (k) = f vh (k) ( ) ( )
(3) (3) (3)
whj2 k + 1 = whj2 (k) + Δwhj2 k + 1
which is:
[ ]
x(3) (13) ∂E(k)
out,1 (k) = kp (19)
(3) (3)
= whj2 (k) + − μ (3) + αΔwhj2 (k)
∂whj2
x(3)
out,2 (k) = ki (14) In the weight update rule, α is the forgetting factor and μ is the
learning rate. When the forgetting factor α value is large, it can accel­
x(3)
out,3 (k) = kd (15) erate the backpropagation rate of the double-layer neural network and
make the convergence speed of the weight coefficient matrix faster. The
gradient formula and weight updating rules of hidden layer 1 and hid­
3.4. Error backpropagation in DPGS
den layer 2 can be derived by the same method, thus it will not be
repeated here.
Following the forward propagation of the two-hidden-layer neural
network, DL-PID determines the weight coefficients matrix between
4. Control algorithm
layers through back-propagation. During backpropagation, the current
expected response of the system is d(k), while the current output is y(k).
4.1. Inversion and voltage phase-locked control
This generates a system error e(k), which can be expressed as:
e(k) = d(k) − y(k) (16) In this study, the perturbation and observation (P&O) method was
utilized in the MPPT algorithm, which continuously detects voltage
The root mean square error E(k) is selected as the optimization
disturbances based on the PV array’s operating time. This technique
objective function:
compares the instant power of the current time with the previous time
1 1 and adjusts the voltage until it reaches zero. Although the P&O method
E(k) = e(k)2 = (d(k) − y(k))2 (17)
2 2 is known to be susceptible to oscillations due to its fixed step size

1916
L. Tian et al. Energy Reports 11 (2024) 1910–1924

Table 1
Simulation parameters of PV Array.
(1) Temperature: 25 ◦ C Irradiance: 1000 W/m2
Project Parameter
Open-circuit voltage VOC /V 309.00
Short-circuit current ISC /A 13.63
Maximum power point power /W 3041.43
Maximum power point voltage/V 258.00

(2) Temperature: 45 ◦ C Irradiance: 1000 W/m2

Project Parameter
Open-circuit voltage VOC /V 286.75
Short-circuit current ISC /A 12.04
Maximum power point power /W 2828.04
Maximum power point voltage/V 235.23

(3) Temperature: 25 ◦ C Irradiance: 600 W/m2

Project Parameter
Open-circuit voltage VOC /V 302.07
Short-circuit current ISC /A 7.09
Maximum power point power /W 1814.69
Maximum power point voltage/V 255.95

Overall, the control structure diagram of the circuit can be depicted

Fig. 10. Algorithm flow chart of improved MPPT.
in Fig. 9:
The first-stage boost network integrates the deep learning MPPT
algorithm to stabilize the DC bus voltage and adaptively modify the
control PID settings in response to environmental changes. In order to
adapt and manage the DC bus voltage and current phase-locked control,
the latter level control works in conjunction with the preceding level
system. Closed-loop control of the inverter voltage and current is ach­
ieved by the inverter using traditional SPWM modulation and a PR
controller to track the AC value of the grid current. The PLL phase-
locked environmental protection certificate inverter voltage and the
grid voltage have the same phase angle. Figs. 10 and 11 respectively
show the improved MPPT control algorithm flow and the control algo­
rithm flow of bus voltage and PLL phase-locked loop.

4.2. The algorithm flow of control

The DPGS satisfies the following algorithm steps for the first circuit:

1. Determine the number of layers of the BP neural network, set the

Fig. 11. Algorithm flow chart of bus voltage control and PLL control.
algorithm (Chou et al., 2020), the proposed DPGS technique effectively
overcomes this issue.
Grid-connected photovoltaic systems must adhere to strict condi­
tions to avoid generating significant current surges in the first few cycles
of deployment. As such, the single-phase grid connection system must
comply with connection requirements rigorously. Additionally, the rear-
stage bridge inverter circuit regulates the voltage of the front-stage DC
bus and utilizes a proportional-integral (PR) controller to govern the
inverter’s AC output. A phase-locked loop (PLL) is employed to ensure
that the inverter’s output voltage phase aligns with the grid phase. This
measure ensures consistency and prevents grid connection failures
caused by voltage and current phase differences.
number of output vectors, the number of hidden layer neurons, the
initial value of the weight coefficient matrix between each layer, and
set the learning rate and forgetting factor;
2. Obtain the current voltage of PV and calculate the power in real-
time;
3. Utilize the P&O technique, the reference voltage value is modified in
accordance with ΔP until ΔP = 0to collect the MPP of PV.
4. Perform forward calculation according to the input of the BP neural
network, determine the input and the output of each neuron in
different layers, and calculate the parameters of PID controller kp, ki,
and kd;
5. Calculate the control quantity u(k) of the PID controller according to
the parameters kp, ki, and kd;
6. Calculate the mean square error function E(k) from the current ex­
pected response d(k) and the current output y(k);
7. Search the bottom of the error surface through the fastest descent
method and update the weight coefficient matrix in real-time;
8. k = k + 1, repeat the preceding steps.
The inversion and PLL satisfy the following algorithm steps for the
second circuit:

1917
L. Tian et al. Energy Reports 11 (2024) 1910–1924

Fig. 12. Boost simulation circuit.

Fig. 13. Internal structure of the DL-PID.

1918
L. Tian et al. Energy Reports 11 (2024) 1910–1924

Fig. 14. PV Array output power control by traditional PID and DPGS. (Temperature: 25 ◦ C, Irradiance: 1000 W/m2).

5. Repeat the preceding steps.

Table 2
Comparison between DPGS and P&O MPPT (Temperature: 25 ◦ C, Irradiance:
5. Case Studies
1000 W/m2).
Response time Maximum power Minimum power r%
5.1. Test platform and parameters
P&O MPPT 0.60 s 3041.22 W 2969.02 W 2.37 %
DPGS 0.40 s 3041.34 W 3040.74 W 0.020 % A single-phase, two-stage, grid-connected solar inverter system is
used as the experimental subject to confirm the viability and efficacy of
1. Set the initial parameters of the second-stage control system; DPGS. Simulation tests are conducted using Matlab software. The PV
2. Set dq-decomposition of grid voltage and obtain grid current phase; panel selects the PV array module of Matlab/Simulink. Under different
3. Control DC bus voltage of first-stage; temperatures and light irradiance, the output voltage, current, and
4. Perform grid current phase locking; power of the simulation model of the PV Array are shown in Table 1, and
the data are kept in two decimal places.

Fig. 15. The curve of SignalBuilder and PV output power (case 1).

Table 3
Comparison between DPGS and P&O MPPT (case1).
Maximum power Minimum power
Response time r%
(Temperature: 25 ◦ C Irradiance: 600 W/m2) (Temperature: 25 ◦ C Irradiance: 600 W/m2)

P&O MPPT 0.62 s 1814.60 W 1700.83 W 6.2 %

DPGS 0.43 s 1814.69 W 1814.28 W 0.023 %

1919
L. Tian et al. Energy Reports 11 (2024) 1910–1924

Fig. 16. The curve of SignalBuilder and PV output power (case 2).

Table 4
Comparison between DPGS and P&O MPPT (case 2).
Maximum power Minimum power
Response time r%
(Temperature: 45 ◦ C Irradiance: 1000 W/m2) (Temperature: 45 ◦ C Irradiance: 1000 W/m2)

P&O MPPT 0.60 s 2828.10 W 2788.52 W 1.40 %

DPGS 0.40 s 2828.03 W 2827.56 W 0.017 %

Table 5
Comparison between DPGS and P&O MPPT (case3).
Maximum power Minimum power
Response time r%
(Temperature: 45 ◦ C Irradiance: 1000 W/m2) (Temperature: 45 ◦ C Irradiance: 1000 W/m2)

P&O MPPT / 2828.03 W 2786.71 W 1.46 %

DPGS 0.42 s 2828.04 W 2827.61 W 0.015 %

Fig. 17. The curve of SignalBuilder and PV output power (case 3).

1920
L. Tian et al. Energy Reports 11 (2024) 1910–1924

Fig. 18. Grid connection voltage, current, and DC bus voltage of DPGS (case 3).

Fig. 19. Parameters of DL-PID (case 3).

The preceding boost simulation circuit is shown in Fig. 12:
The solar output power can be managed using DL-PID in conjunction
with the P&O algorithm, allowing it to remain stable at the MPP when
the ambient conditions vary. The Fig. 13. represents the internal struc­
ture of DL-PID.
sfun_BP is an S function written by .m file. In the program set
learning rate μ = 0.3, forgetting factor α = 0.05. After building the
model, run the simulation. The performance of DPGS was tested under
three different photovoltaic operating scenarios: environmental tem­
perature changes, irradiance changes, and both changes. The unit of
environmental temperature is Celsius (◦ C).
5.2. Results and discussion
5.2.1. PV output power at constant temperature and irradiance
Setting the environmental temperature at 25 ◦ C and the irradiance at
1000 W/m2, the comparison between the DL-PID controller and the
traditional PID controller used in the MPPT of PV shows the following
results. Fig. 14 shows the PV Array output power control by traditional
PID and DPGS when the environmental temperature is set to 25 ◦ C and

1921
L. Tian et al. Energy Reports 11 (2024) 1910–1924

Fig. 20. Comparison of PV output power corresponding to three types of networks in case 1, case 2, and case 3.

irradiance is 1000W/m2. ∑ PPV − PPV min

When the parameters of the conventional PID controller are properly (20)
max
r% =
PPVmean
chosen, the output power of the PV Array may be stabilized at roughly
0.6 s after the simulation begins. We calculated the power ripple rate (r where r represents the power ripple rate, PPVmax and PPVmin represent
%) of PV output power after stabilization. The calculation formula is the maximum value and minimum value of PV output power, respec­
shown in (20): tively. PPVmean is the average value of photovoltaic output power after

1922
L. Tian et al. Energy Reports 11 (2024) 1910–1924

Table 6 at around 400 V, and the high-order harmonics in the inverter current
Comparison between DPGS, single hidden layer, three hidden layers, and P&O are removed through filtering to obtain the grid-connected current. The
MPPT. total output power is 2746.0 W, and the system efficiency is about 97.1
Three %.
Single Traditional
DPGS
hidden layer
hidden
P&O
Fig. 19 depicts the modification of the three DL-PID’s control pa­
layers rameters kp, ki, and kd, during case 3. The research shows that it can
Response case1 0.43 0.30 0.44 0.62 successfully follow the PV array’s maximum power point in DPGS with
time case2 0.40 0.27 0.40 0.60 little power fluctuation, ensuring that the PV power output is constantly
(t/s) case3 0.42 0.28 0.42 /
maintained near the maximum value. DPGS has excellent environmental
Average response
time (t/s)
0.417 0.283 0.420 0.610 adaptability as well as strong self-adaptability.
Average power ripple 0.022
0.104 % 0.024 % 5.312 %
rate % 5.2.5. Comparison of DPGS with single hidden layer and three hidden
layers in stable PV output power
We compared the effectiveness of DPGS with single hidden layer
stabilization.
network and three hidden layers network in stabilizing PV output
It is revealed in Table 2. that the stability power ripple rate is about
power. The corresponding optical output power of these three networks
2.37 %, the highest power value is 3041.22 W, and the minimum power
under the three environmental changes of case 1 to case 3 is shown in
value is 2969.02 W. After the simulation began, the DL-PID controller
Fig. 20.
kept the PV Array’s output power steady at around 0.4 s. After stabili­
At the same time, we calculated the power ripple of the photovoltaic
zation, the power reaches a maximum of 3041.34 W, a minimum of
panels of three types of networks after stabilization under three envi­
3040.74 W, and a fluctuation rate of around 0.020 %.
ronmental conditions: 25 ◦ C 600 W/m2, 25 ◦ C 1000 W/m2, and 45 ◦ C
The output power of a PV Array controlled by a DL-PID is more
1000 W/m2. The response times of the three networks under case 1 to
stable, the response time is quicker, and the curve is smoother when the
case 3 operating conditions were averaged, which are shown in Table 6.
perturbation and observation method is also chosen as an MPPT algo­
Fig. 20 and Table 6. show that all three networks can stabilize the PV
rithm. When compared to utilizing the conventional PID controller, the
output power under frequently changing environmental conditions, and
PV Array’s output power is constantly maintained at its maximum point,
the power ripple is greatly reduced when compared to traditional P&O.
and power fluctuation is much reduced.
However, the response time increases as the number of network layers
increases, which may be a result of the increase in data after the number
5.2.2. PV output power with constant temperature and varying irradiance
of network layers increases, leading to an increase in computational
The simulation time is set to 3 s. The temperature and irradiance
complexity.
change linearly and the change curve is generated by SignalBuilder. The
DPGS is superior to a single hidden layer network based on the data
performance of the DPGS remains accurate in three different situations.
results, which has a lower output power ripple after stabilization. The
The curve of SignalBuilder is set as depicted in Fig. 15 in the PV Array
tracking effect of the three hidden layers network is nearly identical to
temperature is constant and the irradiance varies in case 1. The tem­
that of DPGS for the MPP of PV, increasing the system’s computation
perature value is always held at 25 ◦ C, and from 1 to 2 s, the irradiance
requirements. Additionally, the photovoltaic grid-connected system’s
increases from 600 to 1000 W/m2.
MPP only requires to collect data regarding voltage and current.
Table 3. shows the results of the PV output power in case 1. The
Continued growth in the number of hidden layers is unnecessary, and
average photovoltaic output power, whether utilizing conventional P&O
there might even be overfitting. Considering comprehensively, DPGS
or DPGS, is 1814 W, which is in line with the desired value at a tem­
with double hidden layers has the best effect on MPPT under dramatic
perature of 25 ◦ C and an irradiation of 600 W/m2. Table 3 shows that
environmental changes.
while there is no significant difference in maximum power between the
P&O algorithm and the DPGS method, there is a substantial difference in
6. Conclusion
minimum power, which causes considerable power variations in con­
ventional P&O algorithms.
A data-driven photovoltaic grid-connected system (DPGS) is
designed in this paper. The single-phase two-stage grid-connected sys­
5.2.3. PV output power with varying temperature and constant irradiance
tem is selected as the research object, and the PID controller improved
In case2, when the irradiance is unchanged and the temperature
by the deep neural network can adjust the values of kp, ki, and kd
changes, the curve of SignalBuilder is set as shown in Fig. 16. The
adaptively according to the changes of environmental factors, which
irradiance remains at 1000 W/m2, and the temperature changes from 1 s
ensures the maximum power output of the photovoltaic grid-connected
to 2 s, increasing from 25 ◦ C to 45 ◦ C..
system is stable at the maximum value. DPGS with a double-hidden layer
The outcomes of case 2 are similar to those of case 1, with the
structure outperformed single-layer neural networks and three-layer
photovoltaic output power matching the predetermined value (in
networks. The stable power ripple of DPGS is 0.022 %, and the
Table 4., from 2 s to 3 s, temperature: 45 ◦ C, irradiance: 1000 W/m2).
response time is around 0.4 s. The results of the simulations show that
When employing the DPGS algorithm, the output power fluctuation of
DPGS works effectively with various environmental changes. Hence,
solar systems is greatly decreased, and the response time is improved by
DPGS provides an effective solution for industrial applications.
about 33 %. .
CRediT authorship contribution statement
5.2.4. PV output power with both varying temperature and irradiance
In case 3, the SignalBuilder curve is set as Fig. 17 when the irradiance
Chaoyu Dong: Conceptualization, Supervision, Writing – review &
varies concurrently with the temperature. From 0.5 to 1 s, the temper­
editing, Project administration. Luyu Tian: Conceptualization, Soft­
ature and irradiance rise from 600 W/m2 at 25 ◦ C to 1000 W/m2 at
ware, Methodology, Writing – original draft. Yunfei Mu: Supervision,
45 ◦ C. Waveform descends from 2 s to 3 s before returning to its initial
Writing – review & editing. Hongjie Jia: Supervision, Writing – review
value. Table 5 shows the comparison between DPGS and P&O MPPT in
& editing.
case 3.
Fig. 18 shows the grid-connected voltage, grid-connected current,
and the DC bus voltage of DPGS in case 3. The bus voltage is maintained

1923
L. Tian et al.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
No data was used for the research described in the article.
Acknowledgements
This paper is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation
of China (U23B6006 and 52277116).
References
Aldair, A.A., Obed, A.A., Halihal, A.F., 2018. Design and implementation of ANFIS-
reference model controller based MPPT using FPGA for photovoltaic system. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 82, 2202–2217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.08.071.
Arcos-Pardo F.J., Monroy-Morales J.L., Hernández-Ángeles M., Campos-Gaona D.
Modeling of photovoltaic grid connected generation system based on three level NPC
converter. In: Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Autumn Meeting on
Power, Electronics and Computing (ROPEC) 2017. p. 1–6.http://doi.org/10.1109/
ROPEC.2017.8261642.
Aref, M., Abdelaziz, A.Y., Geem, Z.W., Hong, J., Abo-Elyousr, F.K., 2023. Oscillation
damping neuro-based controllers augmented solar energy penetration management
of power system stability. Energies 16. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16052391.
Bajwa, A.A., Mokhlis, H., Mekhilef, S., Mubin, M., 2019. Enhancing power system
resilience leveraging microgrids: a review. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 11. https://doi.
org/10.1063/1.5066264.
Bendib, B., Belmili, H., Krim, F., 2015. A survey of the most used MPPT methods:
Conventional and advanced algorithms applied for photovoltaic systems. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 45, 637–648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.02.009.
Bertsimas, D., Gupta, V., Kallus, N., 2018. Data-driven robust optimization. Math.
Program. 167, 235–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10107-017-1125-8.
Chen B., Sun P., Liu C., Chen C.-L., Lai J.-S., Yu W., et al. High efficiency transformerless
photovoltaic inverter with wide-range power factor capability. In: Proceedings of the
27th Annual IEEE Applied Power Electronics Conference and Exposition (APEC).
Orlando, FL 2012. p. 575–582. http://doi.org/10.1109/APEC.2012.6165877.
Chou K.-Y., Yang C.-S., Chen Y.-P., 2020. Ieee. Deep Q-network based global maximum
power point tracking for partially shaded PV system. 7th IEEE International
Conference on Consumer Electronics - Taiwan (ICCE-Taiwan). Taoyuan, TAIWAN.
http://doi.org/10.1109/ICCE-Taiwan49838.2020.9258116.
Cabrera-Tobar, A, Bullich-Massagué, E, Aragüés-Peñalba, M, Gomis-Bellmunt, O, 2016.
Review of advanced grid requirements for the integration of large scale photovoltaic
power plants in the transmission system. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 62, 971–987.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.05.044.
Chouksey, A., Awasthi, S., Singh, S.K., 2020. Fuzzy cognitive network-based maximum
power point tracking using a self-tuned adaptive gain scheduled fuzzy proportional
integral derivative controller and improved artificial neural network-based particle
swarm optimization. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 381, 26–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
fss.2019.02.007.
Dong, C., Chu, R., Morstyn, T., McCulloch, M.D., Jia, H., 2021. Online rolling
evolutionary decoder-dispatch framework for the secondary frequency regulation of
time-varying electrical-grid-electric-vehicle system. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 12,
871–884. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2020.3020983.
Dong, C., Wang, J., Li, X., Jin, C., Jiang, W., Zhang, Z., et al., 2023. Synthetic resilience
exploration and economic defense strategy for microgrid-level AC/DC hybrid energy
system. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 38, 2565–2576. https://doi.org/10.1109/
tpel.2022.3207767.
Ferrero Bermejo, J., Gomez Fernandez, J.F., Olivencia Polo, F., Crespo Marquez, A.,
2019. A review of the use of artificial neural network models for energy and
reliability prediction. A study of the solar PV, hydraulic and wind energy sources.
Appl. Sci. -Basel 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9091844.
Gutierrez-Oliva, D., Colmenar-Santos, A., Rosales-Asensio, E., 2022. A review of the state
of the art of industrial microgrids based on renewable energy. Electronics 11.
https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11071002.
Harrag, A., Messalti, S., 2015. Variable step size modified P&O MPPT algorithm using
GA-based hybrid offline/online PID controller. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 49,
1247–1260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.05.003.
Hirsch, A., Parag, Y., Guerrero, J., 2018. Microgrids: a review of technologies, key
drivers, and outstanding issues. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 90, 402–411. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.040.
Inthamoussou, F.A., De Battista, H., Mantz, R.J., 2012. New concept in maximum power
tracking for the control of a photovoltaic/hydrogen system. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy
37, 14951–14958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.01.176.
Kermadi, M., Berkouk, E.M., 2017. Artificial intelligence-based maximum power point
tracking controllers for Photovoltaic systems: comparative study. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 69, 369–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.125.
1924
Energy Reports 11 (2024) 1910–1924
Lakshmi, G.V., Reddy, K.H., 2022. Improved tunicate swarm search-based MPPT for
photovoltaic on a "grid-connected" inverter system. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 29,
78650–78665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-21157-2.
Li, MR, Dong, CY, Xiong, BY, Mu, YF, Yu, XD, Xiao, Q, et al., STTEWS, 2022.
A sequential-transformer thermal early warning system for lithium-ion battery
safety. Applied Energy 328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119965.
Lian, K.L., Jhang, J.H., Tian, I.S., 2014. A maximum power point tracking method based
on perturb-and-observe combined with particle swarm optimization. IEEE J.
Photovolt. 4, 626–633. https://doi.org/10.1109/jphotov.2013.2297513.
Lim, S.-H., Yoon, S.-G., 2022. Dynamic DNR and solar PV smart inverter control scheme
using heterogeneous multi-agent deep reinforcement learning. Energies 15. https://
doi.org/10.3390/en15239220.
Liu, W.J., Niazi, K.A.K., Kerekes, T., Yang, Y.H., 2019. A review on transformerless step-
up single-phase inverters with different DC-link voltage for photovoltaic
applications. Energies 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12193626.
Mazzeo, D., Matera, N., De Luca, P., Baglivo, C., Congedo, P.M., Oliveti, G., 2021.
A literature review and statistical analysis of photovoltaic-wind hybrid renewable
system research by considering the most relevant 550 articles: an upgradable matrix
literature database. J. Clean. Prod. 295 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jclepro.2021.126070.
Montans, F.J., Chinesta, F., Gomez-Bombarelli, R., Kutz, J.N., 2019. Data-driven
modeling and learning in science and engineering. Comptes Rendus Mec. 347,
845–855. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crme.2019.11.009.
Nosratabadi, S.M., Hooshmand, R.A., Gholipour, E., 2017. A comprehensive review on
microgrid and virtual power plant concepts employed for distributed energy
resources scheduling in power systems. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 67, 341–363.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.025.
Razykov, TM, Ferekides, CS, Morel, D, Stefanakos, E, Ullal, HS, Upadhyaya, HM, 2011.
Solar photovoltaic electricity: Current status and future prospects. Sol. Energy 85,
1580–1608. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2010.12.002.
Saravanan, S., Babu, R.N., 2016. Maximum power point tracking algorithms for
photovoltaic system - a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 57, 192–204. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.12.105.
Shrestha, A., Mustafa, A.A., Htike, M.M., You, V., Kakinaka, M., 2022. Evolution of
energy mix in emerging countries: Modern renewable energy, traditional renewable
energy, and non-renewable energy. Renew. Energy 199, 419–432. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.renene.2022.09.018.
Sibtain, D., Murtaza, A.F., Ahmed, N., Sher, H.A., Gulzar, M.M., 2021. Multi control
adaptive fractional order PID control approach for PV/wind connected grid system.
Int. Trans. Electr. Energy Syst. 31 https://doi.org/10.1002/2050-7038.12809.
Silva, R.A.E., Baptista, J.M., Brito, M.C., 2018. Data-driven estimation of expected
photovoltaic generation. Sol. Energy 166, 116–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
solener.2018.03.039.
Qu H. , 2022. Research on control strategy of photovolatic grid connected inverter based
on improved BP neural network and PID. Hunan Univ. of Tech. http://doi.org/10
.27730/d.cnki.ghngy.2022.000446.
Lee H.H., Phan Quoc D., Le Dinh K., Le Minh P., Nguyen Truong Dan V. The New
Maximum Power Point Tracking Algorithm using ANN-Based Solar PV Systems. IEEE
Region 10 Conference on TENCON 2010. Fukuoka, JAPAN2010. p. 2179–2184. htt
p://doi.org/10.1109/TENCON.2010.5686721.
Thangam, T., Muthuvel, K., 2022. Passive fractional-order proportional-integral-
derivative control design of a grid-connected photovoltaic inverter for maximum
power point tracking. Comput. Electr. Eng. 97 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
compeleceng.2021.107657.
Wang, H.M., Wang, G.Q., Qi, J.C., Schandl, H., Li, Y.M., Feng, C.Y., et al., 2020. Scarcity-
weighted fossil fuel footprint of China at the provincial level. Appl. Energy 258.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.114081.
Williams, N.J., Jaramillo, P., Taneja, J., Ustun, T.S., 2015. Enabling private sector
investment in microgrid-based rural electrification in developing countries: a review.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 52, 1268–1281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
rser.2015.07.153.
Yang, B., Yu, T., Shu, H., Zhu, D., An, N., Sang, Y., et al., 2018a. Energy reshaping based
passive fractional-order PID control design and implementation of a grid-connected
PV inverter for MPPT using grouped grey wolf optimizer. Sol. Energy 170, 31–46.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2018.05.034.
Yang, B., Yu, T., Shu, H., Zhu, D., Zeng, F., Sang, Y., et al., 2018b. Perturbation observer
based fractional-order PID control of photovoltaics inverters for solar energy
harvesting via Yin-Yang-Pair optimization. Energy Convers. Manag. 171, 170–187.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.05.097.
Yang, B., Yu, T., Shu, H., Zhu, D., An, N., Sang, Y., et al., 2018c. Perturbation observer
based fractional-order sliding-mode controller for MPPT of grid-connected PV
inverters: design and real-time implementation. Control Eng. Pract. 79, 105–125.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conengprac.2018.07.007.
Yap, K.Y., Sarimuthu, C.R., Lim, J.M.Y., 2020. Artificial intelligence based MPPT
techniques for solar power system: a review. J. Mod. Power Syst. Clean. Energy 8,
1043–1059. https://doi.org/10.35833/mpce.2020.000159.
Yuan, Z., Xiong, G., Fu, X., 2022. Artificial neural network for fault diagnosis of solar
photovoltaic systems: a survey. Energies 15. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15228693.
Yun, X., 2017. Photovolatic power generation system efficiency evaluation. N. China
Electr. Power Univ. https://doi.org/10.7666/d.Y3263630.
Zhou, N., Price, L., Dai, Y.D., Creyts, J., Khanna, N., Fridley, D., et al., 2019. A roadmap
for China to peak carbon dioxide emissions and achieve a 20 % share of non-fossil
fuels in primary energy by 2030. Appl. Energy 239, 793–819. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.01.154.