Cited by 130Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)Artificial Intelligence ApplicationsRenewable Energy and Sustainability

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 190 of the 190 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Potential of Explainable Artificial Intelligence in Advancing Renewable Energy: Challenges and Prospects

Abstract

Modern machine learning (ML) techniques are making inroads in every aspect of renewable energy for optimization and model prediction. The effective utilization of ML techniques for the development and scaling up of renewable energy systems needs a high degree of accountability. However, most of the ML approaches currently in use are termed black box since their work is difficult to comprehend. Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) is an attractive option to solve the issue of poor interoperability in black-box methods. This review investigates the relationship between renewable energy (RE) and XAI. It emphasizes the potential advantages of XAI in improving the performance and efficacy of RE systems. It is realized that although the integration of XAI with RE has enormous potential to alter how energy is produced and consumed, possible hazards and barriers remain to be overcome, particularly concerning transparency, accountability, and fairness. Thus, extensive research is required to address the societal and ethical implications of using XAI in RE and to create standardized data sets and evaluation metrics. In summary, this paper shows the potential, perspectives, opportunities, and challenges of XAI application to RE system management and operation aiming to target the efficient energy-use goals for a more sustainable and trustworthy future.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.3c04343

Cites

190 of 190 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Spreitzer, N.; Haned, H.; van der Linden, I. Evaluating the Practicality of Counterfactual Explanations NeurIPS 2022 Work. TSRML ; 2022; p 11.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 130

Metadata

Authors
Nguyen, V. N., Tarełko, W., Sharma, P., El-Shafay, A. S., Chen, W.-H., Nguyen, P. Q. P., Nguyen, X. P., & Hoang, A. T.
Affiliations
  • HUTECH University (VN)
  • Gdańsk University of Technology (PL)
  • Delhi Skill and Entrepreneurship University (IN)
  • Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University (SA)
  • Tunghai University (TW)
  • Ho Chi Minh City University of Transport (VN)
  • PATET Research Group, Ho Chi Minh City University of Transport, Ho Chi Minh City 700000, Vietnam
  • Dong A University (VN)
Corresponding author
  • Sharma, Prabhakar
  • Chen, Wei-Hsin
  • Hoang, Anh Tuan
Venue
Energy & Fuels
Published
2024-01-19
Volume
38
Issue
3
Pages
1692-1712
ISSN
  • 0887-0624 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5029
OpenAlex
W4391035178
Cited by
130
References
190
Citations by year
2026: 44 · 2025: 52 · 2024: 34
FWCI
19.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Energy & Fuels (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Renewable Energy and Sustainability
Keywords
explainable AI, renewable energy, black-box models, transparency, accountability, fairness, ethical implications, energy system management, energy use efficiency, model interpretability, evaluation metrics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review