Autonomous marine platforms require reliable power while operating under variable waves, solar availability, corrosion, biofouling, fatigue, and costly offshore maintenance. This study presents a literature-grounded computational framework and a prospective validation protocol for a hybrid wave–solar autonomous marine platform. It does not claim a physically validated device. A 3.0 m diameter and 0.40 m draft point-absorber design case is evaluated against published Korean wave-energy studies. A 2025 point-absorber study reported mean absorbed mechanical powers of 3.603 kW in the East Sea and 2.667 kW near Jeju for the 3 m configuration. An independent 2024 Jeju WEC study used conversion, operational, and transmission factors of 0.80, 0.95, and 0.98. Used strictly as a cross-study sensitivity benchmark, their combined factor of 0.7448 maps the published 2.667 kW Jeju mechanical mean to approximately 17.41 MWh/year and the 3.603 kW East Sea mean to approximately 23.52 MWh/year before explicit PTO-rating clipping. These values are literature-derived benchmarks and are not predictions of measured OrganOS device performance. The framework defines a 45-state core validation grid covering significant wave heights of 0.5–2.5 m and periods of 5–9 s, together with prospective 3, 5, and 10 kW PTO comparisons. Fixed, adaptive, and health-aware adaptive PTO control configurations are retained for subsequent validation. The study also introduces MarineShield-X as an unvalidated candidate protection architecture linking corrosion and biofouling mitigation to long-term energy retention. Lifetime Net Energy is defined as a future lifecycle endpoint incorporating delivered energy, auxiliary consumption, maintenance, manufacturing, installation, replacement, and decommissioning energy. The current evidence supports a literature-consistent and computationally plausible research architecture, while exact PTO clipping, OrganOS annual energy production, MarineShield-X performance, optimal PTO rating, and lifecycle superiority remain experimentally unvalidated. Status: LITERATURE-CONSISTENT / COMPUTATIONALLY PLAUSIBLE / EXPERIMENTALLY UNVALIDATED.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Min‐Gi Kim (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: