Year-to-year correlation, record length, and overconfidence in wind resource assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Interannual variability of wind speeds presents a fundamental source of uncertainty in preconstruction energy estimates. Our analysis of one of the longest and geographically most widespread extant sets of instrumental wind-speed observations (62-year records from 60 stations in Canada) shows that deviations from mean resource levels persist over many decades, substantially increasing uncertainty. As a result of this persistence, the performance of each site's last 20 years diverges more widely than expected from the P50 level estimated from its first 42 years: half the sites have either fewer than 5 or more than 15 years exceeding the P50 estimate. In contrast to this 10-year-wide interquartile range, a 4-year-wide range (2.5 times narrower) was found for "control" records where statistical independence was enforced by randomly permuting each station's historical values. Similarly, for sites with capacity factor of 0.35 and interannual variability of 6 %, one would expect 9 years in 10 to fall in the range 0.32–0.38; we find the actual 90 % range to be 0.27–0.43, or three times wider. The previously un-quantified effect of serial correlations favors a shift in resource-assessment thinking from a climatology-focused approach to a persistence-focused approach: for this data set, no improvement in P50 error is gained by using records longer than 4–5 years, and use of records longer than 20 years actually degrades accuracy.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.036 | 0.144 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".