MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2795761301 · doi:10.11159/icesdp18.113

Study on the Hydrodynamic Performance of a Floating KuroshioCurrent Turbine

2018· article· en· W2795761301 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jing‐Fa Tsai, Yi-Xuan Zeng, Forng‐Chen Chiu

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMagnetic Bearings and Levitation Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurrent (fluid)Marine engineeringTurbineEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceElectrical engineeringAerospace engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A 20KW prototype floating current turbine was designed for operating in the Kuroshio Current, passes along the eastern coast of Taiwan at a maximum speed of approximately 1.5m/s.The location and speed of the Kuroshio Current are generally consistent, offering Taiwan a stable and secure energy source.A test apparatus, which included a 800-W 1/5 scale model of the proposed turbine, was prepared to measure the rotation, thrust and torque of the designed turbine.The apparatus was tested in a towing tank at constant speed.The rotation of the turbine was controlled using an electronic brake to simulate the torque induced by the generator.The power coefficient, torque coefficient and thrust coefficient were calculated from the measured data.The relationships of these three coefficients with tip speed ratio were determined.The measured power coefficient and torque coefficient agreed well with the calculated results.Whereas the measured thrust coefficient was higher than that calculated.The likely cause of the high measured thrust coefficient is discussed in this paper.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.185
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental EngineeringSame topicMagnetic Bearings and Levitation DynamicsFrench-language works237,207