MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044730803 · doi:10.1109/csudet.2013.6670982

On the selection of wind turbine generator based on ARMA time series

2013· article· en· W2044730803 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mohammad Tolou Askari, Mohd Zainal Abidin Ab Kadir, Hashim Hizam, Jasronita Jasni

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower System Reliability and Maintenance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWind powerRenewable energyWind speedTurbineAutomotive engineeringKyoto ProtocolEnvironmental scienceSteam turbineElectricityComputer scienceElectricity generationEnvironmental economicsGreenhouse gasPower (physics)EngineeringMeteorologyElectrical engineeringEconomicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By increasing the global warming and environmental challenges the industrial countries commit to reduce the gas emissions and develop the renewable energy based on the Kyoto protocol and also renewable portfolio standard (RPS). Among them, wind resources are more important because of the progress in the technology of its facilities to convert wind to electricity. Wind turbines manufacturer companies improve the efficiency of their facilities during the last decade. On the other hand, the wind generator firms and investors intend to select a suitable wind turbine generators (WTGs) based on the wind distribution in a specific region. In this study, Output power (MW) of four different types of WTGs has been compared. The wind speed data has been collected for 10 years from 2000 to 2009 from Canada Swift Current region. Then, the model of wind speed has been predicted with ARMA time series. In the next stage, the output power of each WTG has been determined with probability method. Finally, the suitable WTG is recommended according to the output power produced.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.333
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.160
Teacher spread0.156 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPower System Reliability and MaintenanceFrench-language works237,207