MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001869302 · doi:10.1029/2009jd013415

Climate and climate variability of the wind power resources in the Great Lakes region of the United States

2010· article· en· W2001869302 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
X. Li, Shiyuan Zhong, Xindi Bian, Warren E. Heilman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate variability and models
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceClimatologyWind speedSpatial distributionSpatial variabilityGlobal wind patternsWind powerMaximum sustained windWind directionGeologyGeographyMeteorologyWind gradient

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The climate and climate variability of low‐level winds over the Great Lakes region of the United States is examined using 30 year (1979–2008) wind records from the recently released North American Regional Reanalysis (NARR), a three‐dimensional, high‐spatial and temporal resolution, and dynamically consistent climate data set. The analyses focus on spatial distribution and seasonal and interannual variability of wind speed at 80 m above the ground, the hub height of the modern, 77 m diameter, 1500 kW wind turbines. The daily mean wind speeds exhibit a large seasonal variability, with the highest mean wind speed (∼6.58 m s −1 ) in November through January and the lowest (∼4.72 m s −1 ) in July and August. The spatial variability of the annual mean winds is small across the entire region and is dominated by land‐water contrasts with stronger winds over the lake surface than over land. Larger interannual variability is found during the winter months, whereas smaller variations occur in mid to late summer. The interannual variability appears to have some connections to El Niño‐Southern Oscillation, with lower mean wind speeds and more frequent occurrences of lulls during major El Niño episodes. Above‐normal ice cover of the Great Lakes appears to be associated with slightly lower wind speeds and vice versa. According to NARR data and the criteria established by wind energy industry, the areas over Lake Superior, Michigan, and Ontario appear to be rich in wind resources, but most land areas in the region are either unsuitable or marginal for potential wind energy development.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.759

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations95
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicClimate variability and modelsFrench-language works237,207