MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146020811 · doi:10.1260/0309-524x.33.3.259

Power Law Extrapolation of Wind Measurements for Predicting Wind Energy Production

2009· article· en· W2146020811 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

VenueWind Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnemometerExtrapolationWind powerWind speedEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyTurbineWind profile power lawPower lawTowerStatisticsEngineeringMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the level of uncertainty that would be expected if anemometer data from a short tower (less than 40 meters) was used to predict wind speeds and power production at typical utility-scale wind turbine hub-heights. Data from five tall towers was used to predict wind speeds at levels above 70 m based on anemometer data from levels below 40 meters. 1/7 power law, two level power law fit, and hybrids of these methods were applied. Predicted wind speeds were compared to the measured wind speeds at the higher levels to assess the level of error in the predictions. Accuracy of predicting upper level winds varied considerably between sites. Predicting this accuracy at a site without upper level wind measurements or prior knowledge of the upper level wind climate is very difficult, and significant uncertainty in the predicted results must be accepted.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.529
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.198
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