MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1492878499 · doi:10.24297/ijct.v14i2.2077

A Statistical Analysis and Datamining Approach for Wind Speed Predication

2014· article· en· W1492878499 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Mahesh K, Dr M V Vijayakumar, Gangadharaiah. Y.H .

Bibliographic record

VenueINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMPUTERS & TECHNOLOGY · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsHorizon College and Seminary
FundersJain University
KeywordsWind speedWind powerWeibull distributionComputer scienceArtificial neural networkData miningEngineeringMeteorologyArtificial intelligenceStatisticsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The wind power industry has seen an unprecedented growth in last few years. The surge in orders for wind turbines has resulted in a producers market. This market imbalance, the relative immaturity of the wind industry, and rapid developments in data processing technology have created an opportunity to improve the performance of wind farms and change misconceptions surrounding their operations. This research offers a new paradigm for the wind power industry, data-driven modeling. Each wind Mast generates extensive data for many parameters, registered as frequently as every minute. As the predictive performance approach is novel to wind industry, it is essential to establish a viable research road map. This paper proposes a data-mining-based methodology for long term wind forecasting (ANN), which is suitable to deal with large real databases. The paper includes a case study based on a real database of five years of wind speed data for a site and discusses results of wind power density was determined by using the Weibull and Rayleigh probability density functions. Wind speed predicted using wind speed data with Datamining methodology using intelligent technology as Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) and a PROLOG program designed to calculate the monthly mean wind speed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.764
Threshold uncertainty score0.272

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF COMPUTERS & TECHNOLOGYSame topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207