Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 28 references

Stochastic Model for a Piezoelectric Energy Harvester Driven by Broadband Vibrations

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A Langevin model with a two-parameter diode bridge reproduces power-versus-load curves of a piezoelectric harvester; high-order correlations of one voltage reveal temporal asymmetry in the nonlinear setup.

desk verdict A competent incremental extension of the same group's Langevin model to rectified loads; the power-vs-R agreement is real but rests on two never-calibrated diode parameters, so the validation claim needs a caveat. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.11816 v1 pith:SRHIHAED submitted 2024-12-16 cond-mat.stat-mech physics.ins-det

Angelo Sanfelice , Luigi Costanzo , Alessandro Lo Schiavo , Alessandro Sarracino , Massimo Vitelli This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.stat-mechphysics.ins-det PACS 05.40.-a84.60.-h
keywords piezoelectricenergyharvesterstochasticLangevinmodelbroadbandvibrationswhitenoisediodebridgerectifierloadresistanceoptimizationtime-reversalasymmetryhigh-ordercorrelationfunctions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper aims to show that a minimal stochastic description—an underdamped Langevin equation driven by white noise, coupled to the load circuit—can capture how a real piezoelectric energy harvester behaves when shaken by random broadband vibrations. The practical point is that the model gives a quantitative route to the load resistance that maximizes extracted power, which is exactly the design question for powering small sensors from ambient vibration. Experiments on a commercial harvester are compared with the model for two load circuits: a plain resistor, and a diode-bridge rectifier with a storage capacitor (the configuration needed to supply DC electronics). In both cases the model reproduces the measured non-monotonic power-versus-resistance curve, with optimal resistances around $3$–$4$ k$\Omega$ and about $30$ k$\Omega$, respectively. The paper further claims that, in the nonlinear setup, time-reversal asymmetry—a hallmark of non-equilibrium dynamics—can be detected from high-order correlation functions of a single recorded voltage, which was not true in the linear setup.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the coupled system of stochastic differential equations (1)–(6): an underdamped Langevin equation for the tip-mass displacement and velocity, an electromechanical coupling term $\theta v_p$ feeding the mechanical dynamics back into the electrical side, and a load equation whose current-voltage characteristic $f(v_p)$ is the only part that changes between configurations. For the linear load $f(v_p)=v_p/R$, the model is Gaussian and exactly solvable, giving the analytic power formula (7) used for parameter calibration. For the diode-bridge rectifier, $f(v_p)$ takes the effective form in Eq. (6) with two constants $I_{k0}$ and $G$, which the paper treats as the entire description of the nonlinear load. The second main tool is the set of connected three- and four-point correlation functions $C^{(3)}_{v_{\rm DC}}(t)$ and $C^{(4)}_{v_{\rm DC}}(t)$ defined in Eqs. (9)–(10); their asymmetry under time reversal is the diagnostic that reveals non-equilibrium dynamics from a single measured time series.

What would settle it

Repeat the experiment at an acceleration not used in calibration (for instance 0.9 g) or with a different storage capacitor, and test whether the numerical model with the same $I_{k0}$ and $G$ still reproduces the measured power-versus-resistance curve; if the predicted optimal resistance or peak power moves away from the data, the effective parameters are specific to the fitted conditions rather than predictive.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the stochastic model of Eqs. (1)–(6) is a valid minimal description for this harvester in both load configurations. In the linear case the model is exactly solvable and yields a closed formula for the extracted power, $P_{\rm harv}^{(I)} = \frac{D_0 M^2 R\theta^2}{M(\gamma+R\theta^2)+C_p R\gamma(C_p K_s R+\gamma+R\theta^2)}$, whose parameters are fitted to one acceleration value and then successfully describe a second one. For the nonlinear diode-bridge configuration, the paper proposes a simplified two-parameter effective model of the rectifier, $I_{k0} = 9 \times 10^{-9}$ A and $G = -133 \times 10^{-11}\,\Omega^{-1}$, and numerical simulations of the same Langevin equations reproduce the experimentally measured average voltage and extracted power over the whole tested range of load resistances. The power curve is non-monotonic with a maximum near $30$ k$\Omega$, which is the optimal load for this rectifier circuit. The same data analysis shows that connected three- and four-point correlation functions of the single measured voltage $v_{\rm DC}$ are not symmetric under time reversal, revealing the non-equilibrium nature of the dynamics in the nonlinear configuration.

Load-bearing premise

The nonlinear power comparison depends on treating the diode bridge as two constant effective parameters, $I_{k0}=9\times10^{-9}$ A and $G=-133\times10^{-11}\,\Omega^{-1}$, valid for every load resistance and both acceleration levels, even though the paper does not disclose how those values were obtained.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For the linear resistive load, the optimal resistance is independent of the forcing acceleration, so one load value serves a range of vibration levels.
  • The same fitted mechanical parameters describe both tested accelerations, indicating that calibrating the model on one condition may transfer to other driving intensities.
  • The two-parameter diode model is enough to locate the optimal load of the rectifier circuit, which makes the model usable for designing the AC/DC stage without simulating the full diode bridge.
  • In the nonlinear configuration, a single measured voltage time series is sufficient to expose time-reversal asymmetry through high-order correlations, unlike the linear configuration where cross-correlations between two variables were needed.
  • Because the model captures the full probability distribution of $v_p$ in both setups, the approach is not limited to mean power but also describes voltage fluctuations, which matter for the electronics being powered.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Since the paper does not explain how $I_{k0}$ and $G$ are obtained, the nonlinear agreement may be a calibration rather than an independent prediction; a sharper test would fix these two constants on one load and then predict the whole power curve.
  • The admitted failure to reproduce the full $v_{\rm DC}$ distribution suggests that any quantity sensitive to higher cumulants of the rectified voltage—such as peak voltage stress on the storage capacitor or efficiency under intermittent loads—may require a more detailed diode model.
  • The high-order-correlation diagnostic demonstrated here could be applied to other nonlinear energy-conversion or biological systems where only one observable is accessible; the paper does not establish the data length needed for reliable detection.
  • If the effective diode parameters turn out to be universal for a given diode type or only depend on easily measured quantities, the model becomes a design tool; otherwise each circuit would need its own calibration.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents a stochastic Langevin model for a piezoelectric energy harvester driven by broadband Gaussian vibrations and compares it with experiments in two load configurations. In Configuration (I), a linear resistive load is treated analytically, yielding the closed-form power expression in Eq. (7); the model parameters are fitted at one acceleration, and the curve is then compared with data at a second acceleration. In Configuration (II), a diode-bridge rectifier with a capacitor and load resistance is modeled by the effective nonlinear equation in Eq. (6), and numerical simulations are compared with measurements of the mean rectified voltage and harvested power as functions of load resistance, with a non-monotonic power curve and an optimum near R* ~ 30 kOhm. The paper also examines three- and four-point connected correlation functions of vDC, claiming that their time asymmetry reveals the nonequilibrium nature of the dynamics, with qualitative agreement between experiment and simulation.

Significance. If the nonlinear configuration were shown to be genuinely predictive, this would be a valuable contribution to stochastic modeling of piezoelectric harvesters with rectified loads, especially the compact effective description of the diode bridge in Eq. (6). The linear configuration is handled carefully: Eq. (7) is analytical, the parameters are fitted at one acceleration and the model then captures data at a second acceleration, and the Gaussian voltage distributions in Fig. 5 are consistent with the linear model. The proposed time-asymmetry analysis for a single measured variable is also interesting and well motivated by earlier work on linear systems. However, the nonlinear part of the paper, which is the main new experimental claim, is currently under-supported: the two effective diode parameters are introduced without disclosing how they were determined, no error bars are given for the central quantities, and the paper itself admits that the full vDC distribution is not captured by the model. These issues make it impossible to judge whether the agreement in Figs. 9 and 10 is an independent prediction or a two-parameter fit.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section III B, Eq. (6)] The effective diode parameters Ik0 = 9e-9 A and G = -133e-11 Ohm^-1 are introduced without stating how they were obtained. If they were chosen by matching the experimental power curve in Fig. 10, then the agreement shown there is a two-parameter interpolation rather than an independent model prediction. Please disclose the calibration procedure, and ideally validate Ik0 and G independently, for example by comparing the effective I-V characteristic in Eq. (6) with a measured diode-bridge characteristic, or by fitting at a single resistance and predicting the full R sweep.
  2. [Figs. 9 and 10, Section III B] No error bars or statistical uncertainties are reported for the mean rectified voltage and the harvested power. Without such uncertainties, the claim of good agreement for the non-monotonic power curve, and in particular for the optimal resistance near R* ~ 30 kOhm, cannot be assessed quantitatively. Please report error bars from repeated measurements or from bootstrap resampling, and give a quantitative measure of agreement such as relative error or chi-square per degree of freedom.
  3. [Fig. 11 and Section III B] The paper states that while average and variance are well described, the full vDC distribution is not reproduced, and attributes this to simplifications in the diode model. Since the harvested power in Eq. (8) is proportional to the second moment of vDC, the distribution tails directly affect the central quantity of the paper. Please quantify the contribution of the tail mismatch to <vDC^2> and discuss whether the model remains reliable for the power curve outside the tested range of load resistances.
  4. [Section III C, Figs. 12 and 13] The claim that time asymmetry is revealed by the high-order correlation functions is based on a visual comparison of C(3) and C(4) with their time-reversed counterparts. No statistical test, confidence intervals, or quantitative asymmetry measure is provided, and the simulation curves show only qualitative agreement with experiment. Please quantify the asymmetry, include error estimates, and state explicitly whether the simulation reproduces the experimental asymmetry within statistical uncertainty.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section II] The experimental section reports the sampling rate fs = 5 kHz but not the duration of each time series or the number of independent realizations; these details are needed to assess stationarity and statistical precision.
  2. [Eqs. (9) and (10)] The definitions of C(3) and C(4) are not obviously normalized cumulants; please clarify the normalization and state explicitly that the time-reversed functions are computed from the same data with the time argument reversed.
  3. [Figs. 4-13] Using a consistent plotting style across panels, such as filled markers for experimental data and lines for simulations, would improve readability; where error bars are absent this should be stated in the captions.
  4. [Section III A] The parameter values M, theta, and gamma are quoted with uncertainties, but the fitting procedure is not described; a sentence on the fitting method (e.g., least squares on log P versus R) would be helpful.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The diode-bridge power curve in Figs. 9-10 rests on undisclosed effective parameters Ik0 and G, so the nonlinear agreement is not shown to be an independent prediction rather than a fit.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section III.B, Equation (6), Figures 9 and 10.]
    "Here, we simplify the treatment, introducing two effective parameters, Ik0 and G, that appear in Equation (6). The effective values of these parameters used in numerical simulations are Ik0 = 9 × 10−9 A and G = −133 × 10−11 Ω−1."

    The central nonlinear claim is that the model reproduces the measured harvested power P_harv^(II) = ⟨v_DC^2⟩/R over the whole resistance sweep in Fig. 10. The dynamics of v_DC are governed by Eq. (6), which depends directly on the two effective parameters Ik0 and G. The paper gives no derivation, no independent measurement, and no disclosed calibration procedure for these parameters; it simply states their values and then reports good agreement. With two free parameters one can match two moments ⟨v_DC⟩ and ⟨v_DC^2⟩ at a given R, and the negative slope G can tune the location of the optimal resistance. The paper itself admits, in the discussion of Fig.

full rationale

The linear configuration (I) is fitted to experimental data using the analytical formula (7), yielding M, θ, and γ, and those values are then fixed for the nonlinear configuration (II). This is a legitimate calibration step: the linear model has a closed-form prediction and the obtained parameters also reproduce the a = 1.0 g case and the voltage distribution in Fig. 5, so that part of the derivation is self-contained against external data. The circularity arises specifically for Configuration (II). The paper introduces two effective diode parameters, Ik0 and G, in Eq. (6), states their numerical values in the text, and then reports that the model reproduces ⟨v_DC⟩ (Fig. 9) and the harvested power ⟨v_DC^2⟩/R (Fig. 10) across many values of R. Crucially, no fitting procedure, measurement, or independent determination of Ik0 and G is given. These parameters directly control the diode current and hence the steady-state v_DC distribution and its moments. With two free parameters one can match two moments, and the fact that the full v_DC distribution is not reproduced (Fig. 11) indicates that the model is not capturing the real diode behavior beyond the second moment. Therefore, the central claim that the stochastic model 'reproduces' the nonlinear power curve is not established as an independent prediction; it could be a two-parameter fit to the very data it is compared against. The mechanical parameters being fitted separately does not remove this circularity, because the disputed quantities in Configuration (II) are exactly the diode parameters. No other circular steps were found: the high-order correlation analysis in Section III.C is a qualitative comparison between experimental and simulated asymmetry, and the authors explicitly state the quantitative disagreement, so that claim is not forced by construction. The paper also cites prior work by the same authors for the linear model, but that model is analytically solvable and the fit is against experimental data, so the citation is not the only support. Overall, the score reflects the partial circularity: the nonlinear power curve is not demonstrated to be a prediction rather than a fit.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

All five free parameters are calibrated or hand-chosen: three mechanical parameters from the linear case and two effective diode parameters. The central nonlinear claim rests on the latter without a disclosed fitting procedure. No new physical entities are postulated beyond an effective circuit description.

free parameters (5)
  • M (tip mass) = 0.0112 kg
    Fitted to the experimental linear-configuration power curve via analytical Eq. (7) at a = 0.8g; fixed for all other runs.
  • theta (electromechanical coupling) = 0.0172 N/V
    Fitted to the same linear-configuration data as M.
  • gamma (air viscous friction) = 0.660 kg/s
    Fitted to the same linear-configuration data as M.
  • Ik0 (diode effective saturation current) = 9e-9 A
    Effective parameter in the diode-bridge model Eq. (6); value stated with no fitting procedure or uncertainty and not derived from the diode datasheet alone.
  • G (diode effective conductance) = -133e-11 ohm^-1
    Effective parameter in Eq. (6); the negative value signals a purely effective parameter rather than a physical conductance, and its origin is undisclosed.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Broadband shaker acceleration is Gaussian white noise with amplitude D0 = a^2 Delta_t / 2 and Delta_t = 1/f_s = 0.0002 s.
    Central driver of the model; invoked in Eq. (2) and Section III A. Real shaker acceleration has finite bandwidth, which is ignored.
  • domain assumption Tip-mass dynamics is underdamped Langevin with linear elastic force -K_s x and viscous drag -gamma v.
    Eqs. (1)-(2). Assumes linear cantilever stiffness and Markovian damping.
  • domain assumption Electromechanical coupling is linear and instantaneous: C_p dv_p/dt = theta v - i_p.
    Eq. (3). Lumped-parameter piezoelectric model inherited from prior work [15].
  • ad hoc to paper The diode bridge can be represented by Eq. (6) with two constant effective parameters and C_DC = 100 uF.
    Introduced in Section III B; no derivation from diode characteristics, and the paper admits the vDC distribution mismatch in Fig. 11.
  • domain assumption Thermal fluctuations on the tip mass are negligible compared with shaker noise.
    Stated in Section III before Eq. (1); standard for vibration harvesters driven by strong external shaking.
  • standard math Stationary averages over long time series equal ensemble averages.
    Used in Eqs. (7)-(10); ergodicity is assumed without convergence tests or statistical checks.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Stochastic Model for a Piezoelectric Energy Harvester Driven by Broadband Vibrations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SRHIHAED

@misc{pith2026241211816,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Stochastic Model for a Piezoelectric Energy Harvester Driven by Broadband Vibrations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SRHIHAED}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.11816}
}
read the original abstract

We present an experimental and numerical study of a piezoelectric energy harvester driven by broadband vibrations. This device can extract power from random fluctuations and can be described by a stochastic model, based on an underdamped Langevin equation with white noise, which mimics the dynamics of the piezoelectric material. A crucial point in the modelisation is represented by the appropriate description of the coupled load circuit that is necessary to harvest electrical energy. We consider a linear load (resistance) and a nonlinear load (diode bridge rectifier connected to the parallel of a capacitance and a load resistance), and focus on the characteristic curve of the extracted power as a function of the load resistance, in order to estimate the optimal values of the parameters that maximise the collected energy. In both cases, we find good agreement between the numerical simulations of the theoretical model and the results obtained in experiments. In particular, we observe a non-monotonic behaviour of the characteristic curve which signals the presence of an optimal value for the load resistance at which the extracted power is maximised. We also address a more theoretical issue, related to the inference of the non-equilibrium features of the system from data: we show that the analysis of high-order correlation functions of the relevant variables, when in the presence of nonlinearities, can represent a simple and effective tool to check the irreversible dynamics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.11816 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Picture of the experimental setup. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. Schematic representation ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Schematic representation ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Comparison between the extracted power [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Probability distributions of the voltage [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Probability distribution of the voltage [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Probability distribution of the voltage [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8. Probability distribution of the voltage [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9. Average [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10. Extracted power [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11. Probability distributions of the voltage [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12. Multi-point correlation functions of the voltage [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_12.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: FIG. 13. Multi-point correlation functions of the voltage [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_13.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

28 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    There’s plenty of energy at the bottom (micro and nano scale nonlinear noise harvesting)

    Gammaitoni, L. There’s plenty of energy at the bottom (micro and nano scale nonlinear noise harvesting). Contemp. Phys. 2012, 53, 119–135

    work page 2012

  2. [2]

    Energy harvesting in wireless sensor networks: A taxonomic survey

    Singh, J.; Kaur, R.; Singh, D. Energy harvesting in wireless sensor networks: A taxonomic survey. Int. J. Energy Res. 2021, 45, 118–140

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    Biomechanical energy harvesting for wearable and mobile devices: State-of-the-art and future directions

    Liu, M.; Qian, F.; Mi, J.; Zuo, L. Biomechanical energy harvesting for wearable and mobile devices: State-of-the-art and future directions. Appl. Energy2022, 321, 119379

    work page

  4. [4]

    Kinetic energy harvesting technologies for applications in land transportation: A comprehensive review

    Pan, H.; Qi, L.; Zhang, Z.; Yan, J. Kinetic energy harvesting technologies for applications in land transportation: A comprehensive review. Appl. Energy2021, 286, 116518

    work page

  5. [5]

    Brownian motors: noisy transport far from equilibrium

    Reimann, P. Brownian motors: noisy transport far from equilibrium. Phys. Rep.2002, 361, 57

    work page 2002

  6. [6]

    Brownian Ratchet in a Thermal Bath Driven by Coulomb Friction

    Gnoli, A.; Petri, A.; Dalton, F.; Gradenigo, G.; Pontuale, G.; Sarracino, A.; Puglisi, A. Brownian Ratchet in a Thermal Bath Driven by Coulomb Friction. Phys. Rev. Lett.2013, 110, 120601

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    Bacterial ratchet motors

    Di Leonardo, R.; Angelani, L.; Dell’Arciprete, D.; Ruocco, G.; Iebba, V.; Schippa, S.; Conte, M.P.; Mecarini, F.; De Angelis, F.; Di Fabrizio, E. Bacterial ratchet motors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA2010, 107, 9541–9545. https://doi.org/10. 1073/pnas.0910426107

    work page

  8. [8]

    Review on innovative piezoelectric materials for mechanical energy harvesting

    Clementi, G.; Cottone, F.; Di Michele, A.; Gammaitoni, L.; Mattarelli, M.; Perna, G.; L´ opez-Su´ arez, M.; Baglio, S.; Trigona, C.; Neri, I. Review on innovative piezoelectric materials for mechanical energy harvesting. Energies 2022, 15, 6227. 11

    work page 2022

Show all 28 references
  1. [9]

    A Passive Design Scheme to Increase the Rectified Power of Piezoelectric Energy Harvesters

    Du, S.; Jia, Y.; Zhao, C.; Amaratunga, G.A.J.; Seshia, A.A. A Passive Design Scheme to Increase the Rectified Power of Piezoelectric Energy Harvesters. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron.2018, 65, 7095

    2018

  2. [10]

    Active Interface for Piezoelectric Harvesters Based on Multi-Variable Maximum Power Point Tracking

    Costanzo, L.; Schiavo, A.L.; Vitelli, M. Active Interface for Piezoelectric Harvesters Based on Multi-Variable Maximum Power Point Tracking. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I Regul. Pap.2020, 67, 2503

    2020

  3. [11]

    Energy harvesters driven by broadband random vibrations

    Halvorsen, E. Energy harvesters driven by broadband random vibrations. J. Microelectromechanical Syst.2008, 17, 1061

    2008

  4. [12]

    Power Extracted From Piezoelectric Harvesters Driven by Non-Sinusoidal Vibra- tions

    Costanzo, L.; Schiavo, A.L.; Vitelli, M. Power Extracted From Piezoelectric Harvesters Driven by Non-Sinusoidal Vibra- tions. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I Regul. Pap.2019, 66, 1291

    2019

  5. [13]

    Analysis of piezoelectric energy harvester under modulated and filtered white Gaussian noise

    Quaranta, G.; Trentadue, F.; Maruccio, C.; Marano, G.C. Analysis of piezoelectric energy harvester under modulated and filtered white Gaussian noise. Mech. Sys. Signal Proc.2018, 104, 134

    2018

  6. [14]

    Experimental Analysis of a Piezoelectric Energy Harvesting System for Harmonic, Random, and Sine on Random Vibration

    Cryns, J.W.; Hatchell, B.K.; Santiago-Rojas, E.; Silvers, K.L. Experimental Analysis of a Piezoelectric Energy Harvesting System for Harmonic, Random, and Sine on Random Vibration. Adv. Acoust. Vib.2013, 10, 241025

    2013

  7. [15]

    Stochastic thermodynamics of a piezoelectric energy harvester model

    Costanzo, L.; Lo Schiavo, A.; Sarracino, A.; Vitelli, M. Stochastic thermodynamics of a piezoelectric energy harvester model. Entropy 2021, 23, 677

    2021

  8. [16]

    Stochastic thermodynamics of an electromagnetic energy harvester

    Costanzo, L.; Lo Schiavo, A.; Sarracino, A.; Vitelli, M. Stochastic thermodynamics of an electromagnetic energy harvester. Entropy 2022, 24, 1222

    2022

  9. [17]

    Inference of Time-Reversal Asymmetry from Time Series in a Piezoelectric Energy Harvester

    Costanzo, L.; Baldassarri, A.; Lo Schiavo, A.; Sarracino, A.; Vitelli, M. Inference of Time-Reversal Asymmetry from Time Series in a Piezoelectric Energy Harvester. Symmetry 2023, 16, 39

    2023

  10. [18]

    Stochastic thermodynamics, fluctuation theorems and molecular machines

    Seifert, U. Stochastic thermodynamics, fluctuation theorems and molecular machines. Rep. Prog. Phys.2012, 75, 126001

    2012

  11. [19]

    Stochastic Systems with Time Delay: Probabilistic and Thermodynamic Descriptions of Non-Markovian Pro- cesses Far from Equilibrium; Springer Nature

    Loos, S.A. Stochastic Systems with Time Delay: Probabilistic and Thermodynamic Descriptions of Non-Markovian Pro- cesses Far from Equilibrium; Springer Nature. 2021

    2021

  12. [20]

    Inference of time irreversibility from incomplete informa- tion: Linear systems and its pitfalls

    Lucente, D.; Baldassarri, A.; Puglisi, A.; Vulpiani, A.; Viale, M. Inference of time irreversibility from incomplete informa- tion: Linear systems and its pitfalls. Phys. Rev. Res.2022, 4, 043103. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.4. 043103

    2022 doi

  13. [21]

    Maximum power point of piezoelectric energy harvesters: A review of optimality condition for electrical tuning

    Brenes, A.; Morel, A.; Juillard, J.; Lefeuvre, E.; Badel, A. Maximum power point of piezoelectric energy harvesters: A review of optimality condition for electrical tuning. Smart Mater. Struct.2020, 29, 033001

    2020

  14. [22]

    Power-extraction circuits for piezoelectric energy harvesters in miniature and low-power applications

    Dicken, J.; Mitcheson, P.D.; Stoianov, I.; Yeatman, E.M. Power-extraction circuits for piezoelectric energy harvesters in miniature and low-power applications. IEEE Trans. Power Electron.2012, 27, 4514–4529

    2012

  15. [23]

    Available online: http://www.linear.com/product/LTC3331

  16. [24]

    Available online: http://www.ti.com/tool/TIDA-006900

  17. [25]

    Available online: https://datasheets.maximintegrated.com/en/ds/MAX17710.pdf

  18. [26]

    Inferring entropy production from short experiments

    Manikandan, S.K.; Gupta, D.; Krishnamurthy, S. Inferring entropy production from short experiments. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2020, 124, 120603

    2020

  19. [27]

    Temperature in and out of equilibrium: A review of concepts, tools and attempts

    Puglisi, A.; Sarracino, A.; Vulpiani, A. Temperature in and out of equilibrium: A review of concepts, tools and attempts. Phys. Rep.2017, 709, 1–60

    2017

  20. [28]

    Sym´ etrie des fluctuations dans le renversement du temps

    Pomeau, Y. Sym´ etrie des fluctuations dans le renversement du temps. J. Phys. 1982, 43, 859–867

    1982

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.