MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2304666654 · doi:10.1115/imece2014-37063

Multi-Objective Energy-Noise Wind Farm Layout Optimization Under Land Use Constraints

2014· article· en· W2304666654 on OpenAlexafffund
Sami Yamani Douzi Sorkhabi, David A. Romero, Gary Yan, Michelle Dao Gu, Joaquín Morán, Michael Morgenroth, Cristina H. Amon

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaHatch (Canada)University of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTerrainWind powerNoise (video)Computer scienceGenetic algorithmTurbineMathematical optimizationVariable (mathematics)Production (economics)Optimization problemEnvironmental scienceEngineeringMathematicsAlgorithmGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, the environmental impact of wind farms has been receiving increasing attention. As land is more extensively exploited for onshore wind farms, they are more likely to be in proximity with human dwellings, infrastructure (e.g. roads, transmission lines) and environmental features (e.g. rivers, lakes, forests). As a result of regulatory constraints, this proximity causes significant portions of the wind farm terrain to become unusable for turbine placement. In this work, we present a constrained, continuous-variable model for layout optimization that takes noise and energy as objective functions, based on Jensen’s wake model and ISO-9613-2 noise calculations. A multi-objective genetic algorithm (NSGA-II) is used to solve the optimization problem, considering a set of land use constraints, which are handled with static and dynamic penalty functions. A set of test cases with different number of turbines and percentages of land availability are solved. Results from this bi-objective optimization model illustrate how the severity of the land use constraints affects the trade-off between energy generation and noise production.

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 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.219
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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWind Energy Research and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207