MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2620296300 · doi:10.1177/0309524x17709730

Improved power curve monitoring of wind turbines

2017· article· en· W2620296300 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 · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMachine Fault Diagnosis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbineWind powerArtificial neural networkPower (physics)Data acquisitionSet (abstract data type)Control theory (sociology)EngineeringSupervisory controlFeature (linguistics)Energy (signal processing)Computer scienceFunction (biology)Control engineeringArtificial intelligenceControl (management)StatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wind turbine power output monitoring can detect anomalies in turbine performance which have the potential to result in unexpected failure. This study examines common Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition data over a period of 20 months. It is common to have more than 150 signals acquired by Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition systems, and applying all is neither practical nor useful. Thus, to address the issue, correlation coefficients analysis has been applied in this work to reveal the most influential parameters on wind turbine active power. Then, radial basis function and multilayer perception artificial neural networks are set up, and their performance is compared in two static and dynamic states. The proposed combination of the feature selection method and the dynamic multilayer perception neural network structure has performed well with favorable prediction error levels compared to other methods. Thus, the combination may be a valuable tool for turbine power curve monitoring.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.246 · 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