MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2787891636 · doi:10.5194/wes-2016-11

Year-to-year correlation, record length, and overconfidence in wind resource assessment

2016· article· en· W2787891636 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicola Bodini, Julie K. Lundquist, Dino Zardi, Mark A. Handschy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsQuantileEstimatorStatisticsWind speedMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceClimatologyEconometricsGeographyMathematicsGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Wind resource assessments predict future production levels from historical data. To characterize how year-to-year variability in past wind speeds affects the certainty of future predictions, we analyze 62-year wind speed records of 60 weather stations in Canada, and compare the actual levels of each station's final 20 years to "predictions" made from previous periods of varying duration. We estimate both median (P50) and 10 % quantile (P90) levels using historical means and standard deviations, validating estimator performance on statistically-independent "control" sequences made by randomly permuting the 62 annual values of each station's record. Errors of estimates made from the control sequences always decline with record length; the central half of the stations’ exceedances falls within ranges of 44–55 % (P50) and 85–95 % (P90) for 42-year estimates. For the actual chronological records, on the other hand, error is lowest when estimates were made from short records (4–5 years) and increases with length after 15 years; for 42-year estimates the corresponding ranges are 0–45 % (P50) and 36–100 % (P90). The strong biases reflect a nearly nationwide downward trend in recorded wind speeds, but even a near-zero-trend subset of 30 stations exhibits interquartile ranges of 24–73 % (P50) and 80–100 % (P90), both twice as large as expected. These findings show that serial correlation in wind speeds can persist across decades, and, if ignored, results in substantial overconfidence in estimated resource levels.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.161
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

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 head0.229
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWind Energy Research and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207