MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2547561449 · doi:10.1115/es2016-59594

Efficient Wind Turbine Micrositing in Large-Scale Wind Farms

2016· article· en· W2547561449 on OpenAlexaff
David Guirguis, David A. Romero, Cristina H. Amon

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWind powerSolverTurbineMathematical optimizationComputer scienceLinear programmingConstraint (computer-aided design)Scale (ratio)MetaheuristicEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As wind energy is established as a sustainable alternative source of electricity, very large-scale wind farms with hundreds of turbines are becoming increasingly common. For the optimal design of wind farm layouts, the number of decision variables is at least twice the number of turbines (e.g., the Cartesian coordinates of each turbine). As the number of turbines increases, the computational cost incurred by the optimization solver to converge to a satisfactory solution increases as well. This issue represents a serious limitation in the computer-aided design of large wind farms. Moreover, the wind farm domains are typically highly constrained including land-availability and proximity constraints. These non-linear constraints increase the complexity of the optimization problem and decrease the likelihood of obtaining even a feasible solution. Several approaches have been proposed for micrositing of wind turbines, including random searches, mixed-integer programs, and metaheuristics. Each of these methods has its own trade-off between the quality of optimized layouts and the computational cost of obtaining the solution. In this paper, we demonstrate the capability of non-linear mathematical programming for optimizing very large-scale wind farms by leveraging explicit, analytical derivatives for the objective and constraint functions, thus overcoming the aforementioned limitations while also providing convergence and local optimality guarantees. For that purpose, two large farms with hundreds of turbines and significant land-use constraints are solved on a standard personal computer.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.411
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWind Energy Research and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207