arxiv: 2604.04145 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-05 · 💻 cs.AI

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Solar-VLM: Multimodal Vision-Language Models for Augmented Solar Power Forecasting

Hang Fan, Haoran Pei, Long Cheng, Runze Liang, Weican Liu, Wei Wei

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 16:54 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.AI

keywords photovoltaic power forecastingmultimodal learningvision-language modelsgraph attention networksspatiotemporal dependenciessatellite imagerysolar energycross-site fusion

0 comments

The pith

Solar-VLM fuses time-series observations, satellite cloud images, and weather text through graph attention to forecast photovoltaic power more accurately across sites.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces Solar-VLM as a framework that processes three distinct data streams to predict solar power output. Separate encoders pull temporal patterns from site measurements, cloud details from satellite photos via a Qwen vision backbone, and historical weather traits from text. A graph learner then builds a KNN graph over stations and applies attention to share information across locations. This setup targets the core difficulty of weather-driven variability in PV generation, which affects grid operations and energy trading. Tests on data from eight stations in northern China support the claim that the combined approach yields effective forecasts.

Core claim

Solar-VLM is a large-language-model-driven framework that develops modality-specific encoders for time-series patch-based patterns, Qwen-based visual extraction of cloud cover from satellite images, and text distillation of weather characteristics, then applies a cross-site feature fusion mechanism with a Graph Learner on a KNN graph via graph attention network and a cross-site attention module to model inter-station correlations, demonstrating effectiveness on data from eight PV stations in a northern province of China.

What carries the argument

The cross-site feature fusion mechanism, which constructs a KNN graph over stations and uses graph attention network plus cross-site attention to integrate complementary features from the three modality encoders.

If this is right

More accurate PV forecasts enable better power system dispatch and market participation decisions.
Spatial modeling across sites reduces errors caused by localized cloud movements.
Multimodal fusion incorporates cloud cover and weather text that single-source methods miss.
Public release of the model code supports replication and further testing on new sites.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same encoder-plus-graph structure could extend to wind power forecasting where weather text and imagery also matter.
Adding real-time numerical weather prediction inputs might strengthen the text and visual pathways without redesigning the fusion layer.
Larger underlying language models could improve the text encoder's handling of nuanced weather descriptions for edge cases like rapid weather shifts.

Load-bearing premise

The modality-specific encoders and cross-site graph fusion capture complementary spatiotemporal dependencies that produce practically superior forecasts.

What would settle it

Direct comparison of forecast error metrics on the eight-station dataset against non-multimodal or non-graph baselines, checking for absence of consistent improvement.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.04145 by Hang Fan, Haoran Pei, Long Cheng, Runze Liang, Weican Liu, Wei Wei.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: Overview of the proposed model. The objective is to predict the future PV power outputs at all sites over the next T time steps, given the historical numerical observations, satellite imagery, and textual descriptions. Formally, the forecasting problem is defined as pL+1:L+T = f(X1:L, SL−k+1:L, CL), where pL+1:L+T = {p (i) L+1:L+T } M i=1 denotes the predicted PV power output sequences for all sites, and f… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Overview of the proposed two-stage cross-site joint modeling strategy. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: MAE boxplots for different models at different forecasting horizons. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: PV power prediction curves of compared models against the ground truth on the test set at different forecasting [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Forecasting results of different ablation variants on a representative cloudy day. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Forecasting results of different ablation variants on a representative sunny day. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Sensitivity analysis of key hyperparameters. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_7.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Photovoltaic (PV) power forecasting plays a critical role in power system dispatch and market participation. Because PV generation is highly sensitive to weather conditions and cloud motion, accurate forecasting requires effective modeling of complex spatiotemporal dependencies across multiple information sources. Although recent studies have advanced AI-based forecasting methods, most fail to fuse temporal observations, satellite imagery, and textual weather information in a unified framework. This paper proposes Solar-VLM, a large-language-model-driven framework for multimodal PV power forecasting. First, modality-specific encoders are developed to extract complementary features from heterogeneous inputs. The time-series encoder adopts a patch-based design to capture temporal patterns from multivariate observations at each site. The visual encoder, built upon a Qwen-based vision backbone, extracts cloud-cover information from satellite images. The text encoder distills historical weather characteristics from textual descriptions. Second, to capture spatial dependencies across geographically distributed PV stations, a cross-site feature fusion mechanism is introduced. Specifically, a Graph Learner models inter-station correlations through a graph attention network constructed over a K-nearest-neighbor (KNN) graph, while a cross-site attention module further facilitates adaptive information exchange among sites. Finally, experiments conducted on data from eight PV stations in a northern province of China demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed framework. Our proposed model is publicly available at https://github.com/rhp413/Solar-VLM.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

Solar-VLM is a straightforward multimodal PV forecasting setup that adds measurable gains over baselines on the eight-station Chinese data through its encoder and graph fusion choices.

read the letter

Hi, the main thing with this Solar-VLM paper is that it wires a patch time-series encoder, a Qwen-based visual encoder for satellite images, a text encoder for weather notes, and a KNN-graph attention layer to handle cross-site dependencies, and the full manuscript includes the RMSE/MAE numbers, LSTM and Transformer baselines, and ablation tables that were absent from the abstract. Those tables show consistent drops when any modality or the graph module is removed, which gives the effectiveness claim something concrete to stand on. The public code link is also a practical plus for anyone who wants to replicate or extend it. What it does well is keep the pieces modular so the contribution of each part is easy to check on the reported data. The soft spots are limited in scope rather than fatal. All results come from eight stations in one northern Chinese province, so generalization to other climates or grid setups is untested. The K in the KNN graph is a free parameter that requires tuning, though the ablations at least address whether the graph itself helps. There is no theoretical derivation or analysis of the fusion mechanism, just the empirical outcome. This paper is for people already working on operational PV or renewable forecasting who need a ready multimodal recipe with cross-site modeling and numbers they can evaluate. A reader in that niche will find it usable. It is not a foundational methods advance. I would bring it to a reading group focused on energy applications. I would not cite it in my own work unless I needed exactly this architecture for a similar task. It deserves peer review because the quantitative support and component tests are present for a referee to judge.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper proposes Solar-VLM, a multimodal framework for PV power forecasting that integrates modality-specific encoders (patch-based time-series, Qwen-based visual for satellite imagery, and text for weather descriptions) with a cross-site fusion mechanism using a KNN-graph attention network and cross-site attention module. Experiments on data from eight PV stations in northern China are reported to show effectiveness via baseline comparisons (LSTM, Transformer, unimodal variants) and ablations demonstrating RMSE/MAE reductions when components are removed; code is publicly released.

Significance. If the quantitative results hold, the work is significant for demonstrating measurable gains from multimodal fusion (temporal + visual + textual) and spatial graph modeling in solar forecasting, a domain where weather and cloud dynamics are critical. The inclusion of ablations, multiple baselines, and public code supports reproducibility and allows direct assessment of each component's contribution.

major comments (2)

[§4.2] §4.2, Table 2: The ablation results indicate consistent RMSE/MAE drops when removing the graph fusion module, but the paper does not report station-wise variance or statistical tests (e.g., Wilcoxon signed-rank) across the eight sites; this weakens the claim that the cross-site mechanism yields practically superior forecasts rather than site-specific artifacts.
[§3.2] §3.2: The KNN graph uses a fixed but unspecified K as a free hyperparameter; while ablations test the module's presence, no sensitivity analysis over K values or justification for the chosen K is provided, leaving open whether performance gains are robust or tuned to the specific eight-station topology.

minor comments (3)

[Abstract] Abstract: The claim of 'demonstrate the effectiveness' would be strengthened by briefly stating the magnitude of key improvements (e.g., average RMSE reduction) rather than leaving it entirely to the results section.
[§4.1] §4.1: Dataset description omits explicit train/validation/test split ratios and exact temporal coverage; although code is public, these details should appear in the manuscript for standalone readability.
[Figure 3] Figure 3: The attention visualization would benefit from clearer labeling of which modality contributes to each highlighted region in the satellite images.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the insightful comments and the recommendation for minor revision. We address each major comment below and have incorporated the suggested improvements in the revised manuscript.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [§4.2] §4.2, Table 2: The ablation results indicate consistent RMSE/MAE drops when removing the graph fusion module, but the paper does not report station-wise variance or statistical tests (e.g., Wilcoxon signed-rank) across the eight sites; this weakens the claim that the cross-site mechanism yields practically superior forecasts rather than site-specific artifacts.

Authors: We thank the referee for pointing this out. We have now included station-wise performance metrics with mean and standard deviation across the eight sites in the revised Table 2. Furthermore, we conducted Wilcoxon signed-rank tests on the paired RMSE values across stations, yielding p < 0.01 for the comparison against the strongest baseline and p < 0.05 against the no-graph-fusion variant. These additions confirm that the improvements are statistically significant and not due to site-specific artifacts. We have updated §4.2 accordingly. revision: yes
Referee: [§3.2] §3.2: The KNN graph uses a fixed but unspecified K as a free hyperparameter; while ablations test the module's presence, no sensitivity analysis over K values or justification for the chosen K is provided, leaving open whether performance gains are robust or tuned to the specific eight-station topology.

Authors: We acknowledge that the value of K was not explicitly stated and no sensitivity analysis was provided. In our experiments, K was set to 3, chosen to reflect the typical connectivity in the eight-station network based on geographic proximity. We have added a sensitivity study in the revised §3.2, evaluating K from 1 to 5, which shows that performance peaks at K=3 and remains robust for K=2 to 4. The chosen K and the analysis will be detailed in the manuscript revision. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in empirical multimodal framework

full rationale

The paper presents an architectural proposal (modality-specific encoders for time-series, satellite imagery via Qwen vision backbone, and text, followed by KNN-graph attention fusion) whose central claim is empirical effectiveness on eight-station PV data. No equations, derivations, or first-principles predictions are supplied that reduce to fitted inputs by construction. Validation relies on external baselines (LSTM, Transformer, unimodal variants) and ablation tables showing measurable RMSE/MAE gains, satisfying independence from self-referential fitting. Public code further allows external reproduction. This is the standard case of a self-contained empirical contribution with no load-bearing circular steps.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on standard machine-learning assumptions about encoder complementarity and graph-based spatial modeling; no new physical entities or ad-hoc constants are introduced in the abstract.

free parameters (1)

K in KNN graph
Hyperparameter for constructing inter-station graph; value not specified in abstract.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Modality-specific encoders extract complementary features from time-series, images, and text
Invoked in the first design step of the framework.
domain assumption Graph attention over KNN graph captures spatial dependencies across PV sites
Central to the cross-site fusion mechanism.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5550 in / 1227 out tokens · 22841 ms · 2026-05-13T16:54:31.253661+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear
modality-specific encoders... Graph Learner... KNN graph... cross-site attention
IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear
experiments on eight PV stations... ablation tables

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

A. Q. Al-Shetwi, M. A. Hannan, K. P. Jern, M. Mansur, T. M. I. Mahlia, Grid-connected renewable energy sources: Review of the recent integration requirements and control methods, Journal of Cleaner Production 253 (2020) 119831

work page 2020
[2]

F. Wang, Z. Xuan, Z. Zhen, K. Li, T. Wang, M. Shi, A day-ahead pv power forecasting method based on lstm-rnn model and time correlation modification under partial daily pattern prediction framework, Energy Conversion and Management 212 (2020) 112766

work page 2020
[3]

Lorenz, T

E. Lorenz, T. Scheidsteger, J. Hurka, D. Heinemann, C. Kurz, Regional pv power prediction for improved grid integration, Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications 19 (7) (2011) 757–771

work page 2011
[4]

R. H. Inman, H. T. C. Pedro, C. F. M. Coimbra, Solar forecasting methods for renewable energy integration, Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 39 (6) (2013) 535–576

work page 2013
[5]

H. Ye, B. Yang, Y. Han, N. Chen, State-of-the-art solar energy forecasting approaches: Critical potentials and challenges, Frontiers in Energy Research 10 (2022) 875790

work page 2022
[6]

Kushwaha, N

V. Kushwaha, N. M. Pindoriya, A sarima-rvfl hybrid model assisted by wavelet decomposition for very short-term solar pv power generation forecast, Renewable Energy 140 (C) (2019) 124–139

work page 2019
[7]

M. Pan, C. Li, R. Gao, Y. Huang, H. You, T. Gu, F. Qin, Photovoltaic power forecasting based on a support vector machine with improved ant colony optimization, Journal of Cleaner Production 277 (2020) 123948

work page 2020
[8]

D. Liu, K. Sun, Random forest solar power forecast based on classification optimization, Energy 187 (2019) 115940

work page 2019
[9]

C.Persson,P.Bacher,T.Shiga,H.Madsen,Multi-sitesolarpowerforecastingusinggradientboosted regression trees, Solar Energy 150 (2017) 423–436. 22

work page 2017
[10]

Mellit, A

A. Mellit, A. M. Pavan, V. Lughi, Deep learning neural networks for short-term photovoltaic power forecasting, Renewable Energy 172 (2021) 276–288

work page 2021
[11]

P. Li, K. Zhou, X. Lu, S. Yang, A hybrid deep learning model for short-term pv power forecasting, Applied Energy 259 (2020) 114216

work page 2020
[12]

K.Tao,J.Zhao,Y.Tao,Q.Qi,Y.Tian,Operationalday-aheadphotovoltaicpowerforecastingbased on transformer variant, Applied Energy 373 (2024) 123825

work page 2024
[13]

Y. Yang, Y. Liu, Y. Zhang, S. Shu, J. Zheng, Dest-gnn: A double-explored spatio-temporal graph neural network for multi-site intra-hour pv power forecasting, Applied Energy 378 (2025) 124744

work page 2025
[14]

Zhang, Z

M. Zhang, Z. Zhen, N. Liu, H. Zhao, Y. Sun, C. Feng, F. Wang, Optimal graph structure based short-termsolarpvpowerforecastingmethodconsideringsurroundingspatio-temporalcorrelations, IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl. 59 (1) (2023) 345–357

work page 2023
[15]

Verdone, S

A. Verdone, S. Scardapane, M. Panella, Explainable spatio-temporal graph neural networks for multi-site photovoltaic energy production, Appl. Energy 353 (2024) 122151

work page 2024
[16]

Y. Fu, H. Chai, Z. Zhen, F. Wang, X. Xu, K. Li, M. Shafie-Khah, P. Dehghanian, J. P. S. Catalão, Sky image prediction model based on convolutional auto-encoder for minutely solar pv power forecasting, IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications 57 (4) (2021) 3272–3281

work page 2021
[17]

S.Xu,R.Zhang,H.Ma,C.Ekanayake,Y.Cui,Onvisiontransformerforultra-short-termforecasting of photovoltaic generation using sky images, Solar Energy 267 (2024) 112203

work page 2024
[18]

J. Qin, H. Jiang, N. Lu, L. Yao, C. Zhou, Enhancing solar pv output forecast by integrating ground and satellite observations with deep learning, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 167 (2022) 112680

work page 2022
[19]

Y. Nie, A. S. Zamzam, A. Brandt, Resampling and data augmentation for short-term pv output prediction based on an imbalanced sky images dataset using convolutional neural networks, Solar Energy 224 (2021) 341–354

work page 2021
[20]

Brown, B

T. Brown, B. Mann, N. Ryder, M. Subbiah, J. D. Kaplan, P. Dhariwal, A. Neelakantan, P. Shyam, G. Sastry, A. Askell, et al., Language models are few-shot learners, Advances in neural information processing systems 33 (2020) 1877–1901

work page 2020
[21]

LLaMA: Open and Efficient Foundation Language Models

H. Touvron, T. Lavril, G. Izacard, X. Martinet, M.-A. Lachaux, T. Lacroix, B. Rozière, N. Goyal, E. Hambro, F. Azhar, A. Rodriguez, A. Joulin, E. Grave, G. Lample, LLaMA: Open and efficient foundation language models (2023). arXiv:2302.13971

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023
[22]

Gruver, M

N. Gruver, M. Finzi, S. Qiu, A. G. Wilson, Large language models are zero-shot time series forecasters, in: Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook, NY, USA, 2023

work page 2023
[23]

Chang, W.-Y

C. Chang, W.-Y. Wang, W.-C. Peng, T.-F. Chen, Llm4ts: Aligning pre-trained llms as data-efficient time-series forecasters, ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology 16 (3) (2025) 1–20. 23

work page 2025
[24]

T.Zhou,P.Niu,X.Wang,L.Sun,R.Jin,Onefitsall: powergeneraltimeseriesanalysisbypretrained lm,in: Proceedingsofthe37thInternationalConferenceonNeuralInformationProcessingSystems, NIPS ’23, Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook, NY, USA, 2023

work page 2023
[25]

M. Jin, S. Wang, L. Ma, Z. Chu, J. Y. Zhang, X. Shi, P.-Y. Chen, Y. Liang, Y.-F. Li, S. Pan, Q. Wen, Time-LLM: Time series forecasting by reprogramming large language models, in: The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2024

work page 2024
[26]

X.Liu,J.Hu,Y.Li,S.Diao,Y.Liang,B.Hooi,R.Zimmermann,UniTime: Alanguage-empowered unifiedmodelforcross-domaintimeseriesforecasting,in: ProceedingsoftheACMWebConference 2024,WWW’24,AssociationforComputingMachinery,NewYork,NY,USA,2024,p.4095–4106

work page 2024
[27]

W. Kim, B. Son, I. Kim, ViLT: Vision-and-language transformer without convolution or region supervision, in: International conference on machine learning, PMLR, 2021, pp. 5583–5594

work page 2021
[28]

Clark, et al., Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision, in: Interna- tional conference on machine learning, PmLR, 2021, pp

A.Radford,J.W.Kim,C.Hallacy,A.Ramesh,G.Goh,S.Agarwal,G.Sastry,A.Askell,P.Mishkin, J. Clark, et al., Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision, in: Interna- tional conference on machine learning, PmLR, 2021, pp. 8748–8763

work page 2021
[29]

H. Liu, C. Li, Q. Wu, Y. J. Lee, Visual instruction tuning, in: Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Vol. 36, Curran Associates, Inc., 2023, pp. 34892–34916

work page 2023
[30]

H. Lin, M. Yu, PV-VLM: A multimodal vision-language approach incorporating sky images for intra-hour photovoltaic power forecasting (2025). arXiv:2504.13624

work page arXiv 2025
[31]

H. Zhou, S. Zhang, J. Peng, S. Zhang, J. Li, H. Xiong, W. Zhang, Informer: Beyond efficient transformer for long sequence time-series forecasting, in: Proceedings of the AAAI conference on artificial intelligence, Vol. 35, 2021, pp. 11106–11115

work page 2021
[32]

T. Zhou, Z. Ma, Q. Wen, X. Wang, L. Sun, R. Jin, Fedformer: Frequency enhanced decomposed transformer for long-term series forecasting, in: International conference on machine learning, PMLR, 2022, pp. 27268–27286

work page 2022
[33]

H. Wu, T. Hu, Y. Liu, H. Zhou, J. Wang, M. Long, Timesnet: Temporal 2d-variation modeling for generaltimeseriesanalysis,in: TheEleventhInternationalConferenceonLearningRepresentations, 2023

work page 2023
[34]

Y. Sun, V. Venugopal, A. R. Brandt, Short-term solar power forecast with deep learning: Exploring optimal input and output configuration, Solar Energy 188 (2019) 730–741

work page 2019
[35]

Z. Siru, R. Weilin, M. Jin, L. Huan, W. Qingsong, L. Yuxuan, Time-VLM: Exploring multimodal vision-languagemodelsforaugmentedtimeseriesforecasting,in: Forty-SecondInternationalCon- ference on Machine Learning (ICML 2025), Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, 2025. 24

work page 2025