MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3170635306 · doi:10.1109/tste.2021.3087018

A Multilevel Modeling Approach Towards Wind Farm Aggregated Power Curve

2021· article· en· W3170635306 on OpenAlexafffund
Mehrdad Mehrjoo, Mohammad Jafari Jozani, M. Pawlak, Bagen Bagen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Sustainable Energy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsManitoba HydroUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacsManitoba HydroUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsWind powerCluster analysisWind power forecastingTurbinePower (physics)Hierarchical clusteringSet (abstract data type)Computer scienceMathematicsAlgorithmMathematical optimizationElectric power systemStatisticsEngineeringElectrical engineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wind farm multiple aggregated power curve modeling plays an important role in reducing the complexity of analyses in wind farm management and annual power prediction. There is a trade-off between the complexity and accuracy of aggregated power curves. In this paper,$K$-Means clustering is utilized to classify turbines in a wind farm into homogeneous groups according to a new set of features based on the overall performance of turbines. We apply multilevel modeling methods, including random intercept and random slope models on turbine clusters, to take into account the hidden correlation among different clusters. Results show that the accuracy of our proposed methods are higher than the single aggregated method alongside an equal complexity. The proposed multiple aggregated power curve model can be utilized to analyze wind farm behavior and wind farm power simulations to forecast wind power.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Sustainable EnergySame topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207