Investigations on Wind Characteristics for Typhoon and Monsoon Wind Speeds Based on Both Stationary and Non-Stationary Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stationary models are usually applied for wind characteristics analysis. However, nonstationarity has been found in the field measurements of typhoons in recent studies; therefore, using traditional models with stationary assumptions to conduct wind characteristics is inadequate. In this research, data acquisition of typhoon wind speeds and monsoon are conducted based on the wind field measurements. Wind speeds of typhoon “Maria” passing through Pintan, Fujian Province, China and the monsoon from 2017.10–2018.10 were obtained to investigate wind characteristics. The run test method is utilized to show that non-stationarity exists in both typhoon and monsoon wind speed, and the percent of non-stationary increases with the increase in time interval. Additionally, results show that stronger non-stationarity exists in typhoon wind speed compared with monsoons. Based on a self-adaptive procedure to extract time varying mean wind speed, a non-stationary model is established to compare with the non-stationary model, which has been applied in the traditional wind characteristic analysis. The fluctuating wind characteristics such as turbulence intensity, gust factor, turbulence integral scale, and wind speed spectrum are analyzed to compare the two models. Results show that the difference of such characteristics between the two models increases with the time interval, indicating the necessity of consideration of non-stationary models, especially for design specifications with larger time intervals. Influences of time intervals are investigated, and relevant recommendations are provided for wind resistance specifications. Our conclusions may provide reference for wind resistance design in engineering applications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".