MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3009624820 · doi:10.3390/en13051245

Wave-Turbulence Decomposition Methods Applied to Tidal Energy Site Assessment

2020· article· en· W3009624820 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Renewable Energy AgencyDalhousie University
KeywordsTurbulenceTurbulence kinetic energyTidal powerKinetic energyGeologyFilter (signal processing)MeteorologyEnvironmental scienceMechanicsPhysicsMarine engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High levels of turbulence have been proven to substantially increase the blade loadings on tidal turbines, outlining the need of properly characterizing turbulence parameters in tidal energy sites. The presence of long surface gravity waves may cause a significant bias on the estimation of these parameters, which requires wave-turbulence decomposition methods that are currently missing from guidelines. Here, three techniques of decomposing wave and turbulence are tested: the stopband filter (SB), moving average filter (MA), and synchrosqueezing wavelet transform (SWT). The study site, Banks Strait, Tasmania, is a 16 km wide channel that presents high potential for tidal energy generation. Wave peak periods at the study site were found to vary mostly between 7 and 12 s, with maximum exceeding 15 s. Turbulence intensities (TI), turbulent kinetic energy (TKE), and integral scales are quantified. Our results indicate differences between the estimates obtained from each method. The MA highly underestimates turbulence, resulting in TI values which were nearly 50% lower than those obtained from other decomposition methods. While TI and TKE estimated from the SB and the SWT techniques are quite similar, integral length scales are considerably underestimated by the SB. These findings reveal that the SWT is a more reliable method because of the more accurate estimates of turbulence parameters and indicate the need of establishing guidelines which address wave-turbulence decomposition in tidal stream energy site assessments. Despite having shown to be quite a versatile technique, further investigation of its applicability in data from other prospective tidal energy sites is necessary to fully assess the generality of the SWT technique.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.284 · 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