MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3013826162 · doi:10.5194/wes-2020-24

Surrogate models for unsteady aerodynamics using non-intrusive Polynomial Chaos Expansions

2020· article· en· W3013826162 on OpenAlexafffund
Rad Haghi, Curran Crawford

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPolynomial chaosAerodynamicsTurbineComputational fluid dynamicsWind powerUncertainty quantificationTurbulenceComputer scienceComputationFlow (mathematics)Wind speedMathematicsEngineeringAlgorithmStatisticsMeteorologyAerospace engineeringMonte Carlo methodPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. In common industrial practice based on IEC standards, wind turbine simulations are computed in the time domain for each mean wind speed bin using six unsteady wind seeds. Different software such as FAST, Balded or HAWC2 can be used to this purpose, to capture the unsteadiness and uncertainties of the wind in the simulations. The statistics of these simulations are extracted and used to calculate fatigue and extreme loads on the wind turbine components. Having only six seeds does not guarantee an accurate estimation of the overall statistics. One solution might be running more seeds; however, this will increase the computation cost. Moreover, to move beyond Blade Element Momentum based tools toward vortex/potential flow formulations, a reduction in the computational cost associated with the unsteady flow and uncertainty handling is required. This study illustrates the stationary character of the unsteady aerodynamic statistics based on the standard turbulence models. Afterward, we propose a non-intrusive Polynomial Chaos Expansion to build a surrogate model of the loads' statistics at each time step, to estimate the statistics more accurately and efficiently.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.242
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.117 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering DesignFrench-language works237,207