MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Caracterización de la velocidad y dirección de viento en la provincia de Chimborazo

2020· article· es· W3025897839 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Diana Katherine Campoverde Santos, Amalia Isabel Escudero Villa, Silvia Mariana Haro Rivera

Bibliographic record

VenueConcienciaDigital · 2020
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural and Food Production Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsHumanitiesGeologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La presente investigación muestra el comportamiento de la velocidad y dirección de viento en la provincia de Chimborazo, se tomaron los datos del 2014 al 2017 de 11 estaciones meteorológicas ubicadas en lugares estratégicos de la zona de estudio. Se estructuró una base de datos de acuerdo con los requerimientos del software WorPlot para la elaboración de las rosas de viento. Se realizó un análisis estadístico descriptivo para caracterizar su comportamiento, se efectuaron contrastes de hipótesis para identificar diferencias significativas en forma mensual, anual y por estaciones. Se determinaron comportamientos similares en los datos de viento entre las estaciones Tunshi y Urbina respecto a la dirección de viento en todos los meses de cada año año; las estaciones Alao, Cumandá, Espoch, Matus, Multitud, Quimiag, San Juan y Tunshi presentan velocidades de viento que alcanzaron los 2.0 m/s, mientras que en Atillo, Tixán y Urbina de 3.0 m/s a 4.5 m/s, determinándose que las zonas con mayor disponibilidad de energía del viento se encuentra en Tixán y Urbina con velocidades que superan los 4 m/s. Finalmente con la ayuda de Google Earth se visualizó las rosas de viento en cada una de las 11 estaciones con el fin de mostrar características predominantes de las variables estudiadas.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score0.728

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConcienciaDigitalSame topicAgricultural and Food Production StudiesFrench-language works237,207