MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2300775146 · doi:10.1115/detc2015-47535

Constrained Multi-Objective Wind Farm Layout Optimization: Introducing a Novel Constraint Handling Approach Based on Constraint Programming

2015· article· en· W2300775146 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Multi-Objective Optimization Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConstraint (computer-aided design)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceWind powerOptimization problemConstraint logic programmingConstraint programmingConstrained optimizationGenetic algorithmGlobal optimizationStochastic programmingEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, land has been exploited extensively for onshore wind farms and turbines are frequently located in proximity to human dwellings, natural habitats, and infrastructure. This proximity has made land use constraints and noise generation and propagation matters of increasing concern for all stakeholders. Hence, wind farm layout optimization approaches should be able to consider and address these concerns. In this study, we perform a constrained multi-objective wind farm layout optimization considering energy and noise as objective functions, and considering land use constraints arising from landowner participation, environmental setbacks and proximity to existing infrastructure. The optimization problem is solved with the NSGA-II algorithm, a multi-objective, continuous variable Genetic Algorithm. A novel hybrid constraint handling tool that uses penalty functions together with Constraint Programming algorithms is introduced. This constraint handling tool performs a combination of local and global searches to find feasible solutions. After verifying the performance of the proposed constraint handling approach with a suite of test functions, it is used together with NSGA-II to optimize a set of wind farm layout optimization test cases with different number of turbines and under different levels of land availability (constraint severity). The optimization results illustrate the potential of the new constraint handling approach to outperform existing constraint handling approaches, leading to better solutions with fewer evaluations of the objective functions and constraints.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.237 · 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