MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2754315984 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/aa81db

For wind turbines in complex terrain, the devil is in the detail

2017· article· en· W2754315984 on OpenAlexaff
Julia Lange, Jakob Mann, Jacob Berg, Dan Parvu, Ryan Kilpatrick, Adrian Costache, Jubayer Chowdhury, Kamran Siddiqui, Horia Hangan

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Fluid Dynamics Research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTerrainWind powerMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceGeologyComputer scienceAerospace engineeringEngineeringGeographyCartographyElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The cost of energy produced by onshore wind turbines is among the lowest available; however, onshore wind turbines are often positioned in a complex terrain, where the wind resources and wind conditions are quite uncertain due to the surrounding topography and/or vegetation. In this study, we use a scale model in a three-dimensional wind-testing chamber to show how minor changes in the terrain can result in significant differences in the flow at turbine height. These differences affect not only the power performance but also the life-time and maintenance costs of wind turbines, and hence, the economy and feasibility of wind turbine projects. We find that the mean wind, wind shear and turbulence level are extremely sensitive to the exact details of the terrain: a small modification of the edge of our scale model, results in a reduction of the estimated annual energy production by at least 50% and an increase in the turbulence level by a factor of five in the worst-case scenario with the most unfavorable wind direction. Wind farm developers should be aware that near escarpments destructive flows can occur and their extent is uncertain thus warranting on-site field measurements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations77
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicAerodynamics and Fluid Dynamics ResearchFrench-language works237,207