MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909489029

Validation of the IEC Technical Specification for Wave Energy Resource Assessment

2015· article· en· W2909489029 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Steffanie Pich­é, Andrew Cornett, Scott Baker, Ioan Nistor

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOffshore Engineering and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResource (disambiguation)Computer scienceReliability engineeringEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents research focusing on the validation of a new Technical Specification (TS) developed by Technical Committee 114 (TC-114) of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). This new TS focuses on the assessment of wave energy resources, primarily using numerical wave models that are well validated by wave measurements. The validation of the TS is conducted through an extensive pilot application on a small section of the Pacific Ocean, off the west coast of Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada. This validation includes the development of a wave model that is then used to simulate the wave conditions and produce the spectral data required to estimate the wave energy resource at the site of interest. The performance of the numerical model has been assessed through comparison with field measurements from a directional wave buoy. The validation includes conducting several sensitivity analyses in order to determine the main sources of error and uncertainty affecting the precision of the numerical wave model output. Interim results indicate that the IEC TS can be successfully applied to estimate wave energy resources with a varying degree of accuracy and a reasonable level of computational effort.

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)0.037
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.072
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0370.072
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicOffshore Engineering and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207