Smart thermal management of photovoltaic systems: Innovative strategies

Kaovinath Appalasamy; R Mamat; Sudhakar Kumarasamy; Kaovinath Appalasamy; R Mamat; Sudhakar Kumarasamy

doi:10.3934/energy.2025013

AIMS Energy

2025, Volume 13, Issue 2: 309-353. doi: 10.3934/energy.2025013

Previous Article Next Article

Review Topical Sections

Smart thermal management of photovoltaic systems: Innovative strategies

1.
Faculty of Mechanical and Automotive Engineering Technology, Universiti Malaysia Pahang Al-Sultan Abdullah, Pekan 26600, Pahang, Malaysia
2.
Centre of Research in Advanced Fluid and Processes (Fluid Centre), Universiti Malaysia Pahang Al-Sultan Abdullah, 26300 Kuantan, Pahang, Malaysia
3.
Centre for Automotive Engineering, Universiti Malaysia Pahang Al-Sultan Abdullah, Pekan 26600, Malaysia
4.
Energy Centre, Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology, Bhopal, 462003, India

Received: 31 December 2024 Revised: 03 March 2025 Accepted: 11 March 2025 Published: 26 March 2025

The efficiency of photovoltaic (PV) panels is significantly affected by environmental factors such as solar irradiance, wind speed, humidity, dust accumulation, shading, and surface temperature, with thermal buildup being the primary cause of efficiency degradation. In this review, we examined various cooling techniques to mitigate heat accumulation and enhance PV panel performance. A comprehensive analysis of active, passive, and hybrid cooling strategies is presented, including heat pipe-based cooling, heat sinks, holographic films, nanofluids, phase change materials (PCM), thermoelectric, biomaterial-based, and hybrid cooling systems. The effectiveness of these techniques in reducing surface temperature and improving electrical efficiency was assessed. Notably, heat pipe cooling and hybrid PCM-thermoelectric systems demonstrated the most promising improvements, with some methods achieving temperature reductions exceeding 40 ℃ and efficiency enhancements over 15%. Future research directions include developing advanced nanofluid formulations, optimizing the design of heat pipes and heat sinks, integrating multi-functional coatings, and enhancing the real-world durability of cooling materials for inventing innovative, sustainable, and eco-friendly cooling systems. By providing a structured assessment of emerging PV cooling techniques, this study is a valuable resource for researchers and engineers striving to improve solar energy efficiency, reduce thermal losses, and advance the sustainability of photovoltaic technologies.

Keywords:

Citation: Kaovinath Appalasamy, R Mamat, Sudhakar Kumarasamy. Smart thermal management of photovoltaic systems: Innovative strategies[J]. AIMS Energy, 2025, 13(2): 309-353. doi: 10.3934/energy.2025013

Related Papers:

[1]	Shengyu Huang, Hengguo Yu, Chuanjun Dai, Zengling Ma, Qi Wang, Min Zhao . Dynamics of a harvested cyanobacteria-fish model with modified Holling type Ⅳ functional response. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(7): 12599-12624. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023561
[2]	Andras Balogh, Tamer Oraby . Stochastic games of parental vaccination decision making and bounded rationality. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2025, 22(2): 355-388. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2025014
[3]	Semu Mitiku Kassa . Three-level global resource allocation model for HIV control: A hierarchical decision system approach. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2018, 15(1): 255-273. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2018011
[4]	Shuang Zhang, Peng Jing, Daibiao Yuan, Chenlu Yang . On parents' choice of the school travel mode during the COVID-19 pandemic. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(9): 9412-9436. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022438
[5]	Jin Zhang, Nan Ma, Zhixuan Wu, Cheng Wang, Yongqiang Yao . Intelligent control of self-driving vehicles based on adaptive sampling supervised actor-critic and human driving experience. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2024, 21(5): 6077-6096. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2024267
[6]	Shingo Iwami, Shinji Nakaoka, Yasuhiro Takeuchi . Mathematical analysis of a HIV model with frequency dependence and viral diversity. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2008, 5(3): 457-476. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2008.5.457
[7]	Bapi Saha . Chance of extinction of populations in food chain model under demographic stochasticity. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(5): 3537-3560. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019177
[8]	Qiwen Wang, Guibao Song, Xiuxia Yang . Mixed-attitude three-way decision model for aerial targets: Threat assessment based on IF-VIKOR-GRA method. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(12): 21514-21536. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023952
[9]	Carlos Camilo-Garay, R. Israel Ortega-Gutiérrez, Hugo Cruz-Suárez . Optimal strategies for a fishery model applied to utility functions. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(1): 518-529. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021028
[10]	C. W. Chukwu, F. Nyabadza, Fatmawati . Modelling the potential role of media campaigns on the control of Listeriosis. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(6): 7580-7601. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021375

Abstract

1. Introduction

Poaching is an ongoing issue threatening endangered species both across land and water habitats. Researchers stress the critical status of endangered animals and their bleak future if poaching continues ^[1,2,3]. Low leopard populations in Maputaland are a result of habitat loss, low food levels, and other factors, including poaching ^[4]. Additionally, overharvesting and poaching is contributing to the depletion of freshwater megafauna such as sturgeons, paddlefish, and the Cuban Crocodile ^[5]. Mathematical models provide insight for potential trajectories under current dynamics, different management strategies, or environmental change. The literature presents several models predicting future population levels. Some modeling techniques include statistical models ^[6], demographic models ^[7], and behavioral models ^[8], and have been used to give insightful information that helps target conservation efforts ^[9]. Reference ^[10] uses Leslie matrices and Monte Carlo simulations to examine uncertainty in population growth rate. Models can also provide comparisons for different management strategies or intensities, further providing insight for implementation ^[11,12]. The work presented by ^[13] creates a model and preforms sensitivity analysis to conclude "protection of diverse coral communities with the presence, but not necessarily higher abundance, of thermally tolerant coral species and symbiont types, mitigation of additional anthropogenic impacts that affect coral–macroalgal competition, early coral life history stages, and coral survivorship, and protection of, and connectivity to, locations with oceanographic features that lead to lower thermal stress."

Endangered species are often hunted for cultural or religious reasons. Shark finning is illegal in many countries, but a large black market encourages poaching. The majority of fin imports go to Hong Kong and other areas of China, where they are used in culturally significant shark fin soup ^[14]. Dating back to the Ming dynasty, shark fin soup has been served as a status symbol. It initially served as a tribute to the emperor due to the risk involved in catching the shark, but later, animals known as being strong or fierce were additionally thought to strengthen whoever consumed them ^[15]. The cultural value of the fins create a market for poaching by having the potential to result in a large profit. Rhino horns also have an illegal market due to cultural demand. Vietnamese people value the horns for believed medical properties surrounding detoxification ^[16].

Several methods are implemented to reduce poaching. Laws or restrictions for hunting and trading are often put in place to penalize partakers and discourage participation. However, due to high demand and high prices, poaching still occurs. The US enacted the 2000 Shark Finning Prohibition Act, the 2009 Shark Conservation Act, and the Shark Fin Trade Elimination Act in 2017 to reduce finning by prohibiting the discarding of finned bodies, requiring sharks to be landed with fins intact, and prohibiting the sale and possession of fins ^[17]. However, the US accounts for only a small percentage of the trade and it is argued that a ban on shark fins would compromise the US's influence on other countries' likelihood to adopt conservation models ^[18].

Community outreach and education programs can help in a variety of ways. One being the allowance of community members to participate in research or volunteer work, which enables the local community to become invested in the conservation effort ^[19,20]. Additionally, creating advertisements such as billboards, media coverage, and short videos can help inform the public of the critical condition of the species as well as the possible danger of consumption ^[21]. Often, local communities are not aware of the damage their actions are doing, making the education of adults and children critical ^[22]. Marine reserves restrict human interaction and are used to protect species by giving them a haven of recovery. They can put quotas on fishing, limit the number of vessels, limit fishing time, as well as many other restrictions ^[22]. These management strategies can be used simultaneously to give endangered species a chance at recovery.

Game theory is a mathematical technique that is used to study player interactions and predict outcomes that depend on the decisions of other player(s). Famously, game theory is used in finance, economics, military, politics, and other fields. One famous game is the Prisoner's Dilemma in which a players can choose to betray the other. Their choice to betray or be loyal to the other prisoner affects the outcome for them both ^[23]. Another famous game, and the one that serves as a basis for the methods in this paper, is the colonel blotto game in which two players allocate resources to different battlefields in the hopes of either winning the most battlefields or the most payoff. Battlefields can represent different platforms depending on the scenario in which the game is applied. The colonel blotto game has been used to explain social scenarios ^[24], network systems ^[25], and military strategy ^[26]. For military scenarios, battlefields can be land regions while for network systems, battlefields can be transmissions when looking at radio jamming attacks ^[27]. More recent work on the colonel blotto game includes the following: (1) analysis of multiplayer and Boolean versions ^[28], (2) equilibria analysis of the two-contestant generalized lottery colonel blotto games along with, under specified criteria, the generalized colonel blotto game ^[29,30], (3) consideration of asymmetrical battlefields and player knowledge ^[31], and (4) optimal strategies formulation using polynomial-sized linear program ^[32].

Here, we use the colonel blotto game to address the issue of poaching where the players are conservationists and poachers. Players compete against each other by allocating a set number of resources to different areas or battlefields that contribute to the poachers' success at undermining conservation efforts and harvesting the species or the conservationists' success at restricting poaching. Extensions have been made to the basic format of the game to allow asymmetrical budgets ^[33]. Heterogeneous battlefields in which one battlefield is worth more than others is also considered. ^[34] proposes a solution to the case of both asymmetrical budgets and heterogeneous battlefields under certain conditions. We adopt this framework in our model with the addition of sub-battlefields and player budgets consisting of three resource types: monetary resources, non-monetary resources, and supporters. Monetary resources are money or economic resources, non-monetary resources are items such as boats, nets, and other physical equipment, and supporters are members of the community that either provide conservation support or a market for poachers to sell to. Players distribute each of their resource types by choosing from nine different strategies to three different battlefields: laws, marine reserves, and community. Each battlefield contributes to the overall payoff of the game in varying amounts, depending on the influence it has on the success of the players. To account for the different resource types in the budget, sub-battlefields corresponding to the resource types were built into each battlefield category with the weight of each sub-battlefield depending on its influence on its parent battlefield. The design of the nine strategies players choose was curated by identifying reasonable actions players may take in order to face their opponent. Additionally, institutional memory can be set to either "no memory", "memory of last round", or "memory of all previous rounds", which determines the information the players have when making a current strategy decision.

It is worth mentioning that another resource allocation game is multi-armed bandit (MAB) problems in which a single player must allocate resources to different projects to either receive initially high rewards or to potentially have a higher delayed reward ^[35]. However, these problems consist only of one player and not two players competing, differing from the game presented here.

In this paper, we approach the issue of poaching using the colonel blotto game framework in a novel approach by introducing a budget involving different resource types along with battlefields that correspond to impactful areas of conservation. Additionally, we add sub-battlefields within each battlefield to correspond to the different resource types and the influence each resource has on that battlefield. We consider how the community support of either conservation or the continuation of poaching affects the success of each player.

2. Materials and methods

The game theory model presented in this paper follows the framework of the famous Blotto game and explores how different strategies can affect the outcome of conservationists fighting against illegal fishing ^[36,37]. Both conservationists and poachers have budgets consisting of resources that they allocate to different battlefields in the hopes of gaining an advantage over their opponent. The budget resources consist of monetary resources, non-monetary resources, and supporters while the battlefields are laws, marine reserves, and the community. The game consists of several rounds, with the budget for the proceeding round reflecting the outcome of the previous. A round refers to players allocating resources and the determination of who won each sub-battlefield based on who allocated more resources to that sub-battlefield. Although evolutionary game theory depends on previous game results, it combines population ecology and game theory and makes use of replicator equations for the evolution of strategies or traits ^[38,39]. Here, we have the player budgets dependent on the previous round's payoff, which differs from the traditional evolutionary game theory approach.

Supporters, or the support of the community, is the driver of the game. Supporters for conservationists are community members that provide aid for conservation efforts by giving money or spreading positive attitudes for conservation. Supporters for poachers are community members that provide a market for poachers to sell to and encourage the continuation of poaching because of its cultural or social value. A player has the community's support when their supporter budget category consists of the majority of the community. The winner of the game is the player who wins the entire community's support. Once a player has the community's support, the other player either loses funding for conservation efforts or a market to sell into, making their efforts fruitless. Players can increase their number of supporters by allocating their resources effectively.

There are a few assumptions to the model that must be considered. First, the budgets of each player are known only to themselves, and therefore they do not know the budgets of their opponent. This differs from standard analyses of game-theoretic constructs, where players are typically assumed to know each other's budgets. However, our goal of this paper is to provide insight into real-world scenarios where players rarely have such knowledge. Second, the community is a fixed value, meaning that there is no flux of incoming or departing people. Resources such as boats, fishing gear, etc. are fixed across rounds, meaning that neither player is significantly investing in the creation of new equipment. Their goal is to use their equipment efficiently. Last, every player must start a game with nonzero values for each budget category.

Our model provides insight to how a budget can be allocated to give the best chance of winning the game.

Conservationists and poachers have different resources that collectively contribute to their goal. As described earlier, resources can be described as monetary, non-monetary, and supporters. We reflect the different resource categories through designing player budgets to reflect the three categories. The players' budgets are expressed as three-dimensional vectors ( $\vec{C}, \vec{P}$ ) containing values for monetary, non-monetary, and supporters resources. The non-monetary category, containing resources such as ships, fishing gear, and equipment is a fixed value across rounds since it is assumed neither player is creating or destroying a significant amount of equipment. These resources are allocated based on the chosen strategy and have significant real-world applications, reflecting the resources available to actual conservationists and poachers, while also considering the potential rewards they offer. The supporters category is the proportion of the community that supports the efforts of the prospective player. Since every member of the community has to be accounted for, if conservationists have the support of $40\%$ of the community, poachers have the remaining $60\%$ . The monetary resources are dependent on how many supporters the player has. For conservationists, monetary resources come from supporter donations, tax collection, or other money collection methods. For poachers, monetary resources come from the market supporting the harvest of the illegal species. If the poachers do not have a market to sell to, they lose all their funding to continue with the illegal activity.

Equations (2.1) and (2.2), show how the budgets of each player is calculated. The components of the vectors are [monetary, non-monetary, supporters]. An example scenario is described with the following parameters. $c_1 = 0.4$ , which means Conservationists have $40\%$ of the community population as supporters. $a_1 = 8$ , meaning each supporter contributes an average of $fanxiexian_myfh8.00$ . Moreover, the poachers have the remaining $60\%$ of the population, making $c_2 = 1-c_1 = 0.6$ . Each poacher supporter contributes an average of $fanxiexian_myfh5.00$ , making $a_2 = 5$ . $b_1 = 200$ and $b_2 = 150$ , which are the non-monetary resources of conservationists and poachers, respectively.

$\begin{equation} \vec{C} = [a_1c_1*\text{population}, b_1, c_1*\text{population} ] \end{equation}$

(2.1)

$\begin{equation} \vec{P} = [a_2c_2*\text{population}, b_2, c_2*\text{population} ] \end{equation}$

(2.2)

After each round is won, the budgets are reevaluated based off of the payoff of the previous round, with the redistribution of the community being the driving factor.

Although there are many different areas where conservationists could make an impact, and different areas poachers must navigate in order to continue their practice, we focus on three major categories: laws, marine reserves, and community. Therefore, we designed the three battlefields to reflect this. Laws encompass policy creation and enforcement for the conservationists and encompasses policy repeal and ramification avoidance for poachers. Marine reserves include the creation and patrolling of areas deemed a marine reserve for conservationists, while for poachers, it includes police avoidance and the ability to operate effectively in the protected area. The community battlefield involves winning over supporters through campaigning, education, emphasis on traditions, or other outreach techniques. A payoff bank is set at the beginning of the game assigning each battlefield a percentage according to the contribution it has on the system. Ultimately, the player with the highest payoff wins the round. Equation (2.3) gives a vector representing a payoff distribution. The components correspond to laws, reserves, and community respectively. Thus, for example, if $p_1 = 0.15$ , $p_2 = 0.3$ , and $p_3 = 0.55$ , then laws have a payoff of 15% of the payoff bank, reserves have 30% of the payoff bank, and community 55% of the payoff bank. It is a requirement that all the probabilities sum to one so the entirety of the payoff bank is accounted for without allotting more than exists.

$\begin{equation} \text{Payoff Distribution} = [p_1, p_2, p_3] \end{equation}$

(2.3)

Within each battlefield, there are three sub-battlefields corresponding to the players' monetary, non-monetary, and supporter resources. This is to ensure budget categories are compared in compatible terms since, for example, is it not known how one non-monetary resource compares to one supporter. Additionally, one resource type may affect one battlefield category more than the other resource types. To account for this, each sub-battlefield contains a proportion of the battlefield's payoff corresponding to how much effect it would have on its parent battlefield. This creates the payoff matrix found in expression (2.4). The columns are the laws, reserves, and community battlefields while the rows are the monetary, non-monetary, and supporters sub-battlefields. Equation (2.5) gives the payoff matrix parameter values used for analysis. It assigns 55% of the laws battlefield's payoff to the monetary sub-battlefield, 20% to the non-monetary sub-battlefield, and 25% to the supporters sub-battlefield. Similar assignments are made for the reserves and community battlefields' payoffs. The monetary sub-battlefield holds the most for laws, non-monetary for the marine reserves sub-battlefield, and supporters for the community sub-battlefield. These could be altered to be scenario specific; however, we believe the distribution of each battlefield's payoff among its corresponding sub-battlefields presented in Eq (2.5) gives a reasonable and applicable scenario. It is required that the percentages of the sub-battlefields within its parent battlefield sum to one. Unlike player budgets, battlefield payoffs do not depend on previous rounds. The payoff matrix set at the beginning of the game remains fixed through the duration of the game.

$\begin{array}{*{20}{l}} {}&{{\text{laws payoff}}\;\;\;\;{\text{reserves payoff}}\;\;\;\;{\text{community payoff}}} \\ \begin{array}{l} {\text{monetary}} \hfill \\ {\text{non - monetary}} \hfill \\ {\text{supporters}} \hfill \\ \end{array} &{\left( {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}\quad {lm}&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad{rm}&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad{cm} \\ {ln}&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad{rn}&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad{cn} \\ {ls}&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad{rs}&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad{cs} \end{array}} \quad\quad\quad\right)} \end{array}$

(2.4)

$\begin{array}{*{20}{l}} {}&{{\text{laws payoff}}\;\;\;\;{\text{reserves payoff}}\;\;\;\;{\text{community payoff}}} \\ \begin{array}{l} {\text{monetary}} \hfill \\ {\text{non - monetary}} \hfill \\ {\text{supporters}} \hfill \\ \end{array} &{\left( {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}\quad {0.55}&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad{0.3}&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad{0.3} \\ {0.2}&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad{0.5}&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad{0.1} \\ {0.25}&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad{0.2}&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad{0.6} \end{array}} \quad\quad\quad\right)} \end{array}$

(2.5)

The implementation of the payoff matrix enables the battlefield to distribute it's payoff to both players according to the resources they allocated to it.

Both players have the ability to choose from nine strategies. They are listed below with supplementary examples as needed. Although the different strategies players can implement may exceed the ones listed here, we choose the following strategies by evaluating logical choices the players may make. We do not consider all possible options, since some allocations do not provide a viable strategy for reasonable players to make. Depending on the application of this model, some strategies can be removed or different strategies may be added. The players know the payoff distribution and may make decisions reflecting battlefield and sub-battlefield influences or payoff weights. Players may choose to allocate most of their resources to the battlefield or sub-battlefields containing the potential for the most payoff. Additionally, since the community battlefield ends the game once a player wins the community's support, players may choose to allocate more resources to the community battlefield. However, players may also attempt to predict what their opposition might do and allocate resources to battlefields they think their opposition might neglect. For example, they may anticipate their opposition allocating most resources to the highest paying battlefield or sub-battlefield and, therefore, allocate most of their resources to one or both the other battlefields or sub-battlefields. Table 1 summarizes the rationale behind the strategies listed along with categorizing them into three major categories: equitably dispersed, greedy, and opponent-conscious.

Table 1. This table summarizes the various allocation strategies categorized into three types: Equitably dispersed, greedy, and opponent-conscious. These categories illustrate the rationale behind players' strategic choices, such as targeting the battlefield with the highest payoff or anticipating the opponent's move.

	Strategy Names and Numbers	Description
Equitably Dispersed	(1) Even (6) Proportional Battlefields	Distributes resources systematically without strategically considering battlefield payoff or attempting to predict the opponents' move
Greedy	(2) Dominant Sub-battlefield (5) Dominant Battlefield (7) Community	Distributes resources in an attempt to win the highest advantage withoutanticipating the opponents' move
Opponent-conscious	(3) Proportional Non-dominant Sub-battlefields (4) Disproportional Non-dominant Sub-battlefields (8) Dominant Two Battlefields (9) Dominant and Community Battlefields	Distributes resources in an attempt to win the overall advantage by anticipating the opponents' move

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

1) Even: Allocate resources evenly across all battlefields and sub-battlefields.

2) Dominant sub-battlefield: Allocate all resources of a particular type to the sub-battlefield that contributes the most payoff for that battlefield. If the same sub-battlefield type contributes the most in two different battlefields, then the resources are split according to how much more one battlefield contributes than the other. If all three battlefields have the same top contributing sub-battlefields, distribute resources evenly across battlefields.

● Example: If the sub-battlefield in the battlefield laws that contains the most payoff contribution is monetary (0.55), and if the sub-battlefield in the reserves battlefield that has the most payoff contribution is monetary (0.5), then $\frac{0.55}{0.5} = 1.1$ more resources would go towards the laws battlefield. Thus, if the budget is 100, $1.1x+x = 100 \implies x = 100/2.2 = 47.619$ would go towards the laws battlefield and 52.381 would go to reserves battlefield. The category not accounted for is distributed across battlefields according to the contribution of the battlefields.

3) Proportional non-dominant sub-battlefields: Allocate resources of a particular type to the sub-battlefields that do not contribute the highest payoff. That way, they can win the most payoff from that battlefield without winning the highest paying sub-battlefield. If two battlefields share the same sub-battlefield as the second (third) most contributing, then split the resources proportionally to how much they contribute similar to the example in Strategy 2. If all three share the same second (third) contributing sub-battlefield, distribute evenly across battlefields. If one battlefield shares a second highest contributing sub-battlefield with a third contributing sub-battlefield in a different sub-battlefield, then all the resources go to the battlefield that has the second highest contributing sub-battlefield.

4) Disproportional non-dominant sub-battlefields: Allocate resources of a particular type to the sub-battlefields that do not contribute the most payoff, but if two battlefields share a second (third) sub-battlefield, then the majority (90–95%) goes the the battlefield that contributes the most while a minority (5–10%) goes to the other.

5) Dominant battlefield: If the payoff of the battlefield with the most payoff contribution is greater than the sum of the payoff contributions from the two remaining battlefields, then allocate all resources of all types to the battlefield that contributes the most. If the payoff of the battlefield with the most contribution is less than the sum of the contributions from the two remaining battlefields, then split all resources proportionally (same as in the example of Strategy 2) of all types to the two battlefields that do not contribute the most payoff.

6) Proportional battlefields: Distribute resources accordingly to how much payoff contribution the battlefield holds.

● Example: If the laws battlefield hold 15%, the reserves battlefield 30%, and the community battlefield 55%, then 15% of the monetary, non-Monetary, and supporter budgets would go to the laws battlefield, 30% of the monetary, non-monetary, and supporter budgets would go to the reserves battlefield, etc.

7) Community:Always allocate all resources to the community battlefield because the more supporters a player has, the larger their supporter and monetary budgets will be for the next round.

8) Dominant two battlefields: Allocate resources proportionally to the the top two battlefields with the highest payoff similarly to the method in the Strategy 2 example. If all battlefields have equal payoff, allocate resources evenly across battlefields.

9) Dominant and community battlefields: Allocate resources proportionally to the battlefield with the highest payoff and the community battlefield similarly to the method in the Strategy 2 example. If all battlefields have equal payoff, allocate resources evenly across battlefields.

If "no memory" is selected then, in every round, both players have equal probability of selecting any of the nine strategies. A scenario such as this represents a case where the turnover for either poachers, conservationists, or both correspond with the time frame of the rounds. This means that there is a new group of poachers or conservationists each round. Since there is no one left from the previous round to share which strategy was used, the current members know only the outcome, not the method, and therefore have to make a decision independent of the strategy chosen in the previous round.

If "memory of last round" is selected, then the results of the previous round influence the strategy decision. Similar to the "no memory" scenario, there could exist a turnover in at least one of the player categories. However, the turnover is longer than the time frame of a round and shorter than the time frame of two rounds. This means there exists people from the previous round to inform which strategy led them to the current results and current budgets. After one round, the information is lost as the people present during two rounds ago are replaced by new members. If the player won the previous round, then the player has a predetermined probability of adopting the previous strategy. Equation (2.6) illustrates how the probability of adoption is calculated.

$\begin{equation} P(\text{adopting previous strategy}) = \frac{\text{payoff won in previous round}}{\text{Payoff Bank}} \end{equation}$

(2.6)

If the previous strategy is not adopted then, then players have equal probability of choosing any of the nine strategy, as they would if they had "no memory".

Last, if "memory of all previous rounds" is selected, then players remember the outcomes of all previous rounds, giving them the option of replaying the strategy that awarded them the highest payoff. A case of "memory of all previous rounds" represents a scenario where poacher and Conservationist members maintain excellent records of previous strategies used and the corresponding results for current members to refer to when approaching a new round. The probability of adopting the most successful previous strategy is found using Eq (2.6). No matter which institutional memory scenario is chosen, the game is over when one player wins the support of the entirety of the community.

A game is made up of one or more rounds in which each player chooses a strategy and allocates their budget. The outcome determines who won the round, or if one player has collected the entire community as supporters, who won the game. If the community is still split between players, the budgets for the next round are determined by the outcome of the previous round. The winner of the round is the player with the highest awarded payoff.

3. Results

To understand the outcome of the game and potentially aid in decision making, the results from a single round played with budgets adopting extreme cases are compared. Extreme cases are where players have a budget containing a large amount of one resource and a minimal amount of the other two. The values selected as the large and small amounts are arbitrary and could have been chosen differently as long as they are sufficiently large or small, respectively.

The different extreme player budget cases account for different applicable scenarios. For example, if conservationists have high monetary resources and poachers have high supporters, then this could represent a case where poaching has cultural or religious value, but a portion of taxes go toward methods to reducing illegal fishing. An example of this is the importance of sharks in Chinese and Hawaiian cultures. For the Chinese, it originated as a delicacy reserved for the emperor or the wealthy, while in Hawaii, sharks are rarely eaten, but hold religious significance such as being influential spirits ^[14].

If conservationists have high supporters and poachers have high monetary resources, then it could mean that conservationists have a lot of supporters, but do not have effective fund raising methods or governmental aid. Community conserved areas (CCAs) are areas that are protected via community based rules and regulations and are most common among indigenous or rural communities ^[40]. Moreover, poachers are selling the illegal species at an inflated price so not many customers are required. Whale sharks are a highly conserved species of shark with consequences such as high fees and imprisonment for poaching or market participation, but areas such as Indonesia still have issues with poaching due to the high price of the fish ^[41].

We are assuming that if either player has high non-monetary resources, it is due to a previous acquirement of the resources. Non-monetary resources are fixed throughout the game meaning that a significant amount of equipment or other non-monetary resources is not gained or lost throughout the game.

Additional to single round results with extreme player budgets, heatmaps of full game outcomes give results of player wins according to how many rounds the game consists of and the institutional memory setting. Together, these analyses provide a basis for predicting player outcomes and strategy suggestions for desirable results.

In order to predict a player's outcome after one round of play, each player's possible strategies are played against all the other player's strategies and the payoff distribution is depicted by heatmaps. Figure 1 provides the distributions for each player in the extreme scenarios. That is, when a player has a large amount of one resource and minimal amount of the other two. The values chosen are arbitrary but capture the desired extreme scenario properties. Since all people in the community must be accounted for, if one player has the majority of the population as supporters, then the other player must have the minority. This reduces the number of combinations significantly. To determine the winner, we calculate the difference between the conservationists' and poachers' payoffs, with a positive value indicating a conservationists win and a negative value indicating a poachers win. Additionally, the battlefields' payoffs are distributed among its sub-battlefields according to the distribution outlined in Eq (2.5). Box plots of single round comparisons can be found in the Appendix (Figures A1–A12) and provide more accessible insight into the distribution statistics, particularly median values. In addition to the consideration of budget extremes, different battlefield payoff distributions are considered, including even battlefield payoffs, the majority going to the community battlefield with the resources battlefield having twice the payoff as the laws battlefield, and the majority going to the community battlefield with the resources battlefield having half the payoff as the laws battlefield. The community battlefield carries the most contribution in the non-equal battlefield payoff scenarios due to the community being the driving factor for both the game termination and the next round monetary budget. The Payoff Bank value is 100 and the community population is 100 persons.

Figure 1. Column (1) represents when battlefield payoff distribution is [Laws, Marine Reserves, Community] = [0.15 0.3 0.55]. Column (2) represents when battlefield payoff distribution is [Laws, Marine Reserves, Community] = [0.3 0.15 0.55]. Column (3) represents when battlefield payoff distribution is even. That is, [Laws, Marine Reserves, Community] = [0.3333 0.3333 0.3333]. For (a)–(f), the budget for conservationists is [Low, Low, High] = [1*(People), 10, 0.9(Population)], and the budget for poachers is [High, Low, Low] = [20*(People), 10, 0.1*(Population)] in (a)–(c), and [Low, High, Low] = [1*(People), 200, 0.1*(Population)] in (d)–(f). For (g)–(L), the budget for poachers is [Low, Low, High] = [1*(People), 10, 0.9(Population)], and the budget for conservationists is [High, Low, Low] = [20*(People), 10, 0.1*(Population)] in (g)–(i), and [Low, High, Low] = [1*(People), 200, 0.1*(Population)] in (j)–(L). The legend refers to the difference between the conservationists' and poachers' payoffs, with positive values indicating a Conservationist win and negative values indicating a poacher win.

[1]	Lv Y (2023) Transitioning to sustainable energy: Opportunities, challenges, and the potential of blockchain technology. Front Energy Res, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2023.1258044 doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2023.1258044
[2]	Østergaard PA, Duic N, Noorollahi Y, et al. (2020) Sustainable development using renewable energy technology. Renewable Energy 146: 2430–2437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.08.094 doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2019.08.094
[3]	Rabaia MKH, Abdelkareem MA, Sayed ET, et al. (2021) Environmental impacts of solar energy systems: A review. Sci Total Environ 754: 141989. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141989 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141989
[4]	El-Hadary MI, Senthilraja S, Zayed ME (2023) A hybrid system coupling spiral type solar photovoltaic thermal collector and electrocatalytic hydrogen production cell: Experimental investigation and numerical modeling. Process Saf Environ Prot 170: 1101–1120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2022.12.079 doi: 10.1016/j.psep.2022.12.079
[5]	Debbarma M, Sudhakar K, Baredar P (2017) Thermal modeling, exergy analysis, performance of BIPV and BIPVT: A review. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 73: 1276–1288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.02.035 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.02.035
[6]	Abd Elaziz M, Senthilraja S, Zayed ME, et al. (2021) A new random vector functional link integrated with mayfly optimization algorithm for performance prediction of solar photovoltaic thermal collector combined with electrolytic hydrogen production system. Appl Therm Eng 193: 117055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2021.117055 doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2021.117055
[7]	Kalogirou SA (2023) Solar energy engineering: Processes and systems. Academic Press (3rd Edition). Avaialble from: https://shop.elsevier.com/books/solar-energy-engineering/kalogirou/978-0-323-99350-0.
[8]	Attia MEH, Zayed ME, Kabeel AE (2024) Design and performance optimization of a novel zigzag channeled solar photovoltaic thermal system: Numerical investigation and parametric analysis. J Clean Prod 434: 140220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140220 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.140220
[9]	Bourisli RI, Zaher FA, Aldalali BS (2024) Reducing the operating temperature and improving the efficiency of PV modules using guiding vanes. Sol Energy 269: 112345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2024.112345 doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2024.112345
[10]	Dhilipan J, Vijayalakshmi N, Shanmugam DB (2022) Performance and efficiency of different types of solar cell material—A review. Mater Today Proc 66: 1295–1302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.05.132 doi: 10.1016/j.matpr.2022.05.132
[11]	Dwivedi P, Sudhakar K, Soni A, et al. (2020) Advanced cooling techniques of PV modules: A state of art. Case Stud Therm Eng, 21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2020.100674 doi: 10.1016/j.csite.2020.100674
[12]	Kazem HA, Al-Waeli AA, Chaichan MT, et al. (2023) Enhancement of photovoltaic module performance using passive cooling (Fins): A comprehensive review. Case Stud Therm Eng 49: 103316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2023.103316 doi: 10.1016/j.csite.2023.103316
[13]	Maghrabie HM, Elsaid K, Sayed ET, et al. (2022) Phase change materials based on nanoparticles for enhancing the performance of solar photovoltaic panels: A review. J Energy Storage 48: 103937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2021.103937 doi: 10.1016/j.est.2021.103937
[14]	Tiwari S, Swaminathan M, Harender SES, et al. (2022) Performance enhancement of the photovoltaic system with different cooling methods. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 29: 45107–45130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-20330-x doi: 10.1007/s11356-022-20330-x
[15]	Sharaby MR, Younes M, Baz F, et al. (2024) State-of-the-Art review: Nanofluids for photovoltaic thermal systems. J Contemp Technol Aappl Eng 3: 11–24. https://doi.org/10.21608/jctae.2024.288445.1025 doi: 10.21608/jctae.2024.288445.1025
[16]	Sheik MA, Aravindan MK, Cuce E, et al. (2022) A comprehensive review on recent advancements in cooling of solar photovoltaic systems using phase change materials. Int J Low-Carbon Technol 17: 768–783. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlct/ctac053 doi: 10.1093/ijlct/ctac053
[17]	Solar radiation: What it is and how it is produced—Iberdrola. Accessed: Jun. 22, 2023. Available from: https://www.iberdrola.com/social-commitment/solar-radiation.
[18]	Kumar Gupta A, Kakkar S, Chaudhary R, et al. (2021) Sun irradiance trappers for solar PV module to operate on maximum power: An experimental study. https://doi.org/10.17762/turcomat.v12i5.1759
[19]	Singh AK Singh RR (2021) An overview of factors influencing solar power efficiency and strategies for enhancing. 2021 Innovations Power Adv Comput Techno (i-PACT). https://doi.org/10.1109/i-PACT52855.2021.9696845
[20]	Ramkiran B, Sundarabalan CK, Sudhakar K (2020) Performance evaluation of solar PV module with filters in an outdoor environment. Case Stud Therm Eng 21: 100700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2020.100700 doi: 10.1016/j.csite.2020.100700
[21]	Al-Maghalseh M (2018) Experimental study to investigate the effect of dust, wind speed and temperature on the PV module performance. Jordan J Mech Ind Eng 12: 123–129.
[22]	Climate of Singapore (2024) Available from: https://www.weather.gov.sg/climate-climate-of-singapore/.
[23]	Panjwani MK, Narejo GB (2014) Effect of humidity on the efficiency of solar cell (photovoltaic). Int J Eng Res Gen Sci, 2.
[24]	Hosenuzzaman M, Hasanuzzaman M, Rahim NA, et al. (2014) Factors affecting the PV based power generation. 3rd IET International Conference on Clean Energy and Technology (CEAT) 2014, 20. https://doi.org/10.1049/cp.2014.1467
[25]	Abderrezek M, Fathi M (2017) Experimental study of the dust effect on photovoltaic panels' energy yield. Sol Energy 142: 308–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2016.12.040 doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2016.12.040
[26]	Fouad MM, Shihata LA, Morgan ESI (2017) An integrated review of factors influencing the performance of photovoltaic panels. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 80: 1499–1511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.141 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.141
[27]	Kumar P, Shukla AK, Sudhakar K, et al. (2017) Experimental exergy analysis of water-cooled PV module. Int J Exergy 23: 197–209. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEX.2017.085768 doi: 10.1504/IJEX.2017.085768
[28]	Bernadette D, Twizerimana M, Bakundukize A, et al. (2021) Analysis of shading effects in solar PV system. Int J Sustainable Green Energy 10: 47. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijrse.20211002.13 doi: 10.11648/j.ijrse.20211002.13
[29]	Bilen K, Erdoğan İ (2023) Effects of cooling on performance of photovoltaic/thermal (PV/T) solar panels: A comprehensive review. Sol Energy 262: 111829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2023.111829 doi: 10.1016/j.solener.2023.111829
[30]	Solanki R, Singh V, Varshney L, et al (2023) Advanced cooling technique to improve efficiency of Solar Panel. 2023 International Conference on IoT, Communication and Automation Technology (ICICAT), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICICAT57735.2023.10263658
[31]	Pomares-Hernández C, Zuluaga-García EA, Escorcia Salas GE, et al (2021) Computational modeling of passive and active cooling methods to improve PV panels efficiency. Appl Sci 11: 11370. https://doi.org/10.3390/app112311370 doi: 10.3390/app112311370
[32]	Ahmadi R, Monadinia F, Maleki M (2021) Passive/active photovoltaic-thermal (PVT) system implementing infiltrated phase change material (PCM) in PS-CNT foam. Sol Energy Mater Sol Cells 222: 110942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solmat.2020.110942 doi: 10.1016/j.solmat.2020.110942
[33]	Dida M, Boughali S, Bechki D, et al. (2021) Experimental investigation of a passive cooling system for photovoltaic modules efficiency improvement in hot and arid regions. Energy Convers Manage 243: 114328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2021.114328 doi: 10.1016/j.enconman.2021.114328
[34]	Ahmad EZ, Sopian K, Jarimiet H, et al. (2021) Recent advances in passive cooling methods for photovoltaic performance enhancement. Int J Electr Comput Eng 11: 146. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijece.v11i1.pp146-154 doi: 10.11591/ijece.v11i1.pp146-154
[35]	Rickric OG, Martes AS, Pagatpatan GI, et al. (2020) Hybrid cooling system for solar PV panel. Int J Emerging Trends Eng Res 8: 4079–4083. https://doi.org/10.30534/ijeter/2020/08882020 doi: 10.30534/ijeter/2020/08882020
[36]	Tiwari MK, Mishra V, Dev R, et al (2023) Effects of active cooling techniques to improve the overall efficiency of photovoltaic module—An updated review. E3S Web Conf 387: 01012. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202338701012 doi: 10.1051/e3sconf/202338701012
[37]	Sharaf M, Yousef MS, Huzayyin AS (2022) Review of cooling techniques used to enhance the efficiency of photovoltaic power systems. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 29: 26131–26159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-18719-9 doi: 10.1007/s11356-022-18719-9
[38]	Zohuri B (2016) Heat pipe design and technology: Modern applications for practical thermal managemen. Springer Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29841-2
[39]	Basri MH, Yaakob Y, Kamaruzaman Z, et al. (2022) Heat pipe as a passive cooling device for PV panel performance enhancement. J Adv Res Appl Sci Eng Technol 28: 190–198. https://doi.org/10.37934/araset.28.2.190198 doi: 10.37934/araset.28.2.190198
[40]	Eshghi H, Kahani M, Zamen M (2022) Cooling of photovoltaic panel equipped with single circular heat pipe: An experimental study. 3: 229–235. https://doi.org/10.22044/rera.2022.11523.1097
[41]	Praveenkumar S, Gulakhmadov A, Agyekumet EB, et al. (2022) Experimental study on performance enhancement of a photovoltaic module incorporated with CPU heat pipe—A 5E analysis. Sensors, 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22176367 doi: 10.3390/s22176367
[42]	Al-Amri F, Maatallah TS, Al-Amri OF, et al. (2022) Innovative technique for achieving uniform temperatures across solar panels using heat pipes and liquid immersion cooling in the harsh climate in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Alex Eng J 61: 1413–1424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2021.06.046 doi: 10.1016/j.aej.2021.06.046
[43]	Kaneesamkandi Z, Almalki MJ, Sayeed A, et al. (2023) Passive cooling of PV modules using heat pipe thermosiphon with acetone: Experimental and theoretical study. Appl Sci 13: 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13031457 doi: 10.3390/app13031457
[44]	Sabry M, Lashin A (2023) Performance of a heat-pipe cooled concentrated photovoltaic/thermoelectric hybrid system. Energies 16: 1438. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16031438 doi: 10.3390/en16031438
[45]	Arifin Z, Tjahjana DDDP, Hadi S, et al. (2020) Numerical and experimental investigation of air cooling for photovoltaic panels using aluminum heat sinks. Int J Photoenergy. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/1574274 doi: 10.1155/2020/1574274
[46]	Arifin Z, Suyitno S, Tjahjana DDDP, et al. (2020) The effect of heat sink properties on solar cell cooling systems. Appl Sci 10: 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10217919 doi: 10.3390/app10217919
[47]	Hudișteanu SV, Țurcanu FE, Cherecheș NC, et al. (2021) Enhancement of pv panel power production by passive cooling using heat sinks with perforated fins. Appl Sci 11: 23. https://doi.org/10.3390/app112311323 doi: 10.3390/app112311323
[48]	Salehi R, Jahanbakhshi A, Reza Golzarian M, et al. (2021) Evaluation of solar panel cooling systems using anodized heat sink equipped with thermoelectric module through the parameters of temperature, power and efficiency. Energy Convers Manage: X, 11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecmx.2021.100102 doi: 10.1016/j.ecmx.2021.100102
[49]	Krstic M, Pantic L, Djordjevic S, et al. (2024) Passive cooling of photovoltaic panel by aluminum heat sinks and numerical simulation. Ain Shams Eng J, 15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2023.102330 doi: 10.1016/j.asej.2023.102330
[50]	Elminshawy NAS, El-Damhogi DG, Ibrahim IA, et al. (2022) Assessment of floating photovoltaic productivity with fins-assisted passive cooling. Appl Energy 325: 119810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119810 doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2022.119810
[51]	Kirpichnikova IM, Sudhakar K, Makhsumov IB, et al. (2022) Thermal model of a photovoltaic module with heat-protective film. Case Stud Therm Eng, 30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2021.101744 doi: 10.1016/j.csite.2021.101744
[52]	Yazdanifard F, Ameri M, Ebrahimnia-Bajestan E (2017) Performance of nanofluid-based photovoltaic/thermal systems: A review. Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev 76: 323–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.025 doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.03.025
[53]	Murtadha TK, Dil Hussein AA, Alalwany AAH, et al. (2022) Improving the cooling performance of photovoltaic panels by using two passes circulation of titanium dioxide nanofluid. Case Stud Therm Eng, 36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2022.102191 doi: 10.1016/j.csite.2022.102191
[54]	Hamdan M (2022) Performance enhancement of a photovoltaic module by passive cooling using water-based aluminum oxide nano-fluid. J Ecol Eng 23: 276–286. https://doi.org/10.12911/22998993/146675 doi: 10.12911/22998993/146675
[55]	Ibrahim A, Ramadan MR, Khallaf AEM, et al. (2023) A comprehensive study for Al₂O₃ nanofluid cooling effect on the electrical and thermal properties of polycrystalline solar panels in outdoor conditions. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 30: 106838–106859. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-25928-3 doi: 10.1007/s11356-023-25928-3
[56]	Jose JPA, Soni PK, Hemalatha N, et al. (2023) An analysis of the effects of nanofluid-based serpentine tube cooling enhancement in solar photovoltaic cells for green cities. J Nanomater 2023: 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/3456536 doi: 10.1155/2023/3456536
[57]	Salehi R, Jahanbakhshi A, Ooi JB, et al. (2023) Study on the performance of solar cells cooled with heatsink and nanofluid added with aluminum nanoparticle. Int J Thermofluids, 20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijft.2023.100445 doi: 10.1016/j.ijft.2023.100445
[58]	Abdollahi N, Rahimi M (2020) Potential of water natural circulation coupled with nano-enhanced PCM for PV module cooling. Renewable Energy 147: 302–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.09.002 doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2019.09.002
[59]	Velmurugan K, Karthikeyan V, Korukonda TB, et al. (2020) Experimental studies on PV module cooling with radiation source PCM matrix. IEEE Access 8: 145936–145949. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3012272 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3012272
[60]	Rubaiee S, Fazal MA (2022) The influence of various solar radiations on the efficiency of a photovoltaic solar module integrated with a passive cooling system. Energies 15: 9584. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15249584 doi: 10.3390/en15249584
[61]	Agarwal N, Saxena A (2022) Performance characteristics of a photovoltaic panel integrated with PCM packed cylindrical tubes for cooling. Int J Sustainable Energy 41: 444–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/14786451.2021.1950721 doi: 10.1080/14786451.2021.1950721
[62]	Durez A, Ali M, Waqas A, et al. (2023) Modelling and optimization of phase change materials (PCM)-based passive cooling of solar PV panels in multi climate conditions. Front Energy Res, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2023.1121138 doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2023.1121138
[63]	Sheikh Y, Jasim M, Qasim M, et al. (2024) Enhancing PV solar panel efficiency through integration with a passive Multi-layered PCMs cooling system: A numerical study. Int J Thermofluids 23: 100748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijft.2024.100748 doi: 10.1016/j.ijft.2024.100748
[64]	Drebushchak VA (2008) Introduction the peltier effect. J Therm Anal Calorim 91: 311–315. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-007-8336-9 doi: 10.1007/s10973-007-8336-9
[65]	Metwally H, Mahmoud NA, Aboelsoud W, et al. (2021) Yearly performance of the photovoltaic active cooling system using the thermoelectric generator. Case Stud Therm Eng 27: 101252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2021.101252 doi: 10.1016/j.csite.2021.101252
[66]	Khan MAI, Khan MI, Kazim AH, et al. (2021) An experimental and comparative performance evaluation of a hybrid photovoltaic-thermoelectric system. Front Energy Res, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2021.722514 doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2021.722514
[67]	Praveenkumar S, Agyekum EB, Alwan NT, et al. (2022) Experimental assessment of thermoelectric cooling on the efficiency of PV module. Int J Renewable Energy Res 12: 1670–1681. https://doi.org/10.20508/ijrer.v12i3.13087.g8553 doi: 10.20508/ijrer.v12i3.13087.g8553
[68]	Faheem M, Abu Bakr M, Ali M, et al. (2024) Evaluation of efficiency enhancement in photovoltaic panels via integrated thermoelectric cooling and power generation. Energies 17: 2590. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17112590 doi: 10.3390/en17112590
[69]	Ramkiran B, Sundarabalan CK, Sudhakar K (2021) Sustainable passive cooling strategy for PV module: A comparative analysis. Case Stud Therm Eng, 27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csite.2021.101317 doi: 10.1016/j.csite.2021.101317
[70]	Dwivedi P, Ganesh SA, Sudhakar K (2023) Thermal and electrical performance of uncooled, nature-cooled, and photovoltaic thermal module. Int J Photoenergy. https://doi.org/10.1155/2023/4720545 doi: 10.1155/2023/4720545
[71]	Rukman, NS, Fudholi A, Utari PA, et al. (2021) Bi-fluid cooling effect on electrical characteristics of flexible photovoltaic panel. J Mechatron Electr Power Veh Technol 12: 51–56. https://doi.org/10.14203/j.mev.2021.v12.51-56 doi: 10.14203/j.mev.2021.v12.51-56
[72]	Agyekum EB, PraveenKumar S, Alwan NT (2021) Effect of dual surface cooling of solar photovoltaic panel on the efficiency of the module: Experimental investigation. Heliyon 7: e07920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07920 doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07920
[73]	Chiang W, Permana I, Wang F, et al. (2022) Experimental investigation for an innovative hybrid photovoltaic/Thermal (PV/T) solar system. Energy Rep 8: 910–918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2022.10.264 doi: 10.1016/j.egyr.2022.10.264
[74]	Azmi MSFM, Hussain MH, Rahim SRA, et al. (2023) Hybrid cooling system for solar photovoltaic panel. J Phys Conf Ser 2550: 012004. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/2550/1/012004 doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/2550/1/012004
[75]	Madurai Elavarasan R, Nadarajah M, Pugazhendhi R, et al. (2024) An experimental investigation on coalescing the potentiality of PCM, fins and water to achieve sturdy cooling effect on PV panels. Appl Energy 356: 122371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.122371 doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2023.122371
[76]	Said Z, Ahmad FF, Radwan AM, et al. (2023) New thermal management technique for PV module using Mist/PCM/Husk: An experimental study. 401: 136798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136798
[77]	Kumar R, Montero FJ, Lamba R, et al. (2023) Thermal management of photovoltaic-thermoelectric generator hybrid system using radiative cooling and heat pipe. Appl Therm Eng 227: 120420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2023.120420 doi: 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2023.120420
[78]	Hamed MH, Hassan H, Ookawara S, et al. (2024) Performance comparative study on passively cooled concentrated photovoltaic (PV) using adsorption/desorption and heat sink cooling methods: Experimental investigations. Energy 307: 132700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2024.132700 doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2024.132700

AIMS Energy

Smart thermal management of photovoltaic systems: Innovative strategies

Related Papers:

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Materials and methods

3. Results

4. Discussion, future work, and conclusions

Use of AI tools declaration

Acknowledgments

Conflict of interest

Appendix

References

Reader Comments

通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com

Metrics

Figures and Tables

Other Articles By Authors

Related pages

Tools

Export File

Citation

Format

Content

Catalog