Suitability Assessment of Weather Networks for Wind Data Measurements in the Athabasca Oil Sands Area
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Athabasca Oil Sands Area (AOSA) in Alberta, Canada, is considered to have a high density of weather stations. Therefore, our objective was to determine an optimal network for the wind data measurement that could sufficiently represent the wind variability in the area. We used available historical data records of the weather stations in the three networks in AOSA, i.e., oil sands monitoring (OSM) water quantity program (WQP) and Wood Buffalo Environmental Association (WBEA) edge sites (ES) and meteorological towers (MT) of the air program. Both graphical and quantitative methods were implemented to find the correlations and similarities in the measurements between weather stations in each network. The graphical method (wind rose diagram) was found as a functional tool to understand the patterns of wind directions, but it was not appropriate to quantify and compare between wind speed data of weather stations. Therefore, we applied the quantitative method of the Pearson correlation coefficient (r) and absolute average error (AAE) in finding a relationship between the wind data of station pairs and the percentage of similarity (PS) method in quantifying the closeness/similarity. In the correlation analyses, we found weak to strong correlations in the wind data of OSM WQP (r = 0.04–0.69) and WBEA ES (r = 0.32–0.77), and a strong correlation (r = 0.33–0.86) in most of the station pairs of the WBEA MT network. In the case of AAE, we did not find any acceptable value within the standard operating procedure (SOP) threshold when logically combining the values of the u and v components together. In the similarity analysis, minor similarities were identified between the stations in the three networks. Hence, we presumed that all weather stations would be required to measure wind data in the AOSA.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it