Ramp events forecasting based on long‐term wind power prediction and correction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To mitigate the threat to power system caused by ramp events – large wind power fluctuation, this study proposes an advanced ramp prediction approach based on event detection framework. This approach contains two successive stages of work, including wind power forecasting and ramp detection. Considering high‐performance ramp prediction requires long‐term and accurate wind power prediction results; this study also proposes a hybrid prediction model at the first stage. By using wind power curve to reflect the physic mechanism of wind power generation, data from numerical weather prediction system could be used to realise long‐term trend prediction. Then, a multivariate model is built with a data‐mining algorithm to correct system errors of the primary prediction, which is addressed to improve long‐term prediction performance. At the second stage, a modified swinging door algorithm is applied for ramp detection. Performance of both the proposed long‐term wind power prediction and the corresponding ramp prediction are computed and compared with conventional models on an actual wind dataset. Comprehensive results validated the feasibility and superiority of the proposed ramp prediction approach.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".