MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071988269 · doi:10.1098/rspa.2005.1494

The power potential of tidal currents in channels

2005· article· en· W2071988269 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTidal powerChannel (broadcasting)MechanicsFlux (metallurgy)Power (physics)Environmental scienceTurbineCurrent (fluid)MeteorologyGeologyMarine engineeringPhysicsElectrical engineeringEngineeringOceanographyMaterials scienceThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interest in sources of renewable energy has led to increasing attention being paid to the potential of strong tidal currents. There is a limit to the available power, however, as too many turbines will merely block the flow, reducing the power generated. The maximum average power available from a tidal stream along a channel, such as that between an island and the mainland, is estimated and found to be typically considerably less than the average kinetic energy flux in the undisturbed state through the most constricted cross-section of the channel. A general formula gives the maximum average power as between 20 and 24% of the peak tidal pressure head, from one end of the channel to the other, times the peak of the undisturbed mass flux through the channel. This maximum average power is independent of the location of the turbine ‘fences’ along the channel. The results may also be used to evaluate the power potential of steady ocean currents.

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.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.185
Threshold uncertainty score0.197

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.203 · 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