MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097928761 · doi:10.1109/eeeic.2011.5874865

Comparison of linear, Kalman filter and neural network downscaling of wind speeds from numerical weather prediction

2011· article· en· W2097928761 on OpenAlexaff
Christophe Sibuet Watters, Paul Leahy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
FundersScience Foundation Ireland
KeywordsDownscalingKalman filterWind speedComputer scienceArtificial neural networkEnsemble Kalman filterExtended Kalman filterFilter (signal processing)Invariant extended Kalman filterFast Kalman filterMeteorologyAlgorithmMachine learningArtificial intelligenceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes a refinement of wind speed prediction methods in order to enhance their accuracy for wind energy applications. Specifically, techniques used to downscale raw forecasts from numerical weather prediction models are investigated. Wind speed measurements from several surface meteorological stations are used to test the downscaling process. While classical downscaling methods require large sets of historical data in order to be trained, the Kalman filter has the potential to rapidly estimate the bias that needs to be added to the raw forecasts in order to provide the best fit possible to local observations. In this paper, the Kalman filter technique is applied, and its performance is compared with classical linear and simple artificial neural network downscaling methods. It is shown that while the levels of prediction accuracy attainable are similar to classical techniques, the amount of data required to parameterise the Kalman filter is much less than for other techniques.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

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)0.0070.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 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

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207