MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015941832 · doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2012.11.140

Assessment of SUNY Version 3 Global Horizontal and Direct Normal Solar Irradiance in Canada

2012· article· en· W2015941832 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Réda Djebbar, Robert J. Morris, Didier Thévenard, Richard Perez, James Schlemmer

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Procedia · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSolar Radiation and Photovoltaics
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaNatural Resources Canada
FundersTrent UniversityUniversity of British ColumbiaGovernment of CanadaState University of New York
KeywordsIrradianceEnvironmental scienceMeteorologySolar irradianceLatitudeSolar ResourceSolar energyAtmospheric sciencesClimatologyGeographyEngineeringPhysicsGeologyGeodesy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, hourly, daily and annual solar resource data derived form the latest SUNY solar model (version 3) using visible and infrared satellite data is analysed and compared with ground measured solar data from eighteen northern- latitude locations distributed all across Canada. The statistics of spatial and temporal differences between the two datasets obtained from the two versions of SUNY model, i.e., V1 and V3, are analysed for both global horizontal irradiance (GHI) and direct normal irradiance (DNI). SUNY V3 GHI and DNI data set is also compared to a dataset produced by the MAC3 cloud layer model for ten northern-latitude locations across Canada. The MAC3 model, using ground-based data, is the basis of the weather design input data files referred to in the current Canadian Model National Energy Code. It is also the model used for generating the CWEEDS (Canadian Weather Energy and Engineering Data Sets) long term hourly dataset, which is in turn used to derive the CWEC files (Canadian Weather year for Energy Calculations) also called typical meteorological years. CWEC files are used for design and analysis in various applications, including buildings heating and cooling as well as solar systems. Overall, results show that SUNY V3 has improved slightly compared to SUNY V1 in terms of estimating global and beam irradiance. Comparison of the SUNY V3 beta model with the MAC3 model seems to indicate that SUNY V3 model is resulting in better DNI estimates than those derived by the MAC3 model. Both SUNY V3 and MAC 3 models give similar estimates for GHI.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.115

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations31
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy ProcediaSame topicSolar Radiation and PhotovoltaicsFrench-language works237,207