MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210699318 · doi:10.3390/su14031664

A Numerical Methodology to Predict the Maximum Power Output of Tidal Stream Arrays

2022· article· en· W4210699318 on OpenAlexaff
Soheil Radfar, Roozbeh Panahi, Meysam Majidi Nezhad, Mehdi Neshat

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsJacobs (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTidal powerMarine energyPredictabilityRenewable energyMarine engineeringWind powerPosition (finance)Power (physics)Environmental scienceMeteorologyComputer scienceEngineeringMathematicsGeographyStatisticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to its high level of consistency and predictability, tidal stream energy is a feasible and promising type of renewable energy for future development and investment. Numerical modeling of tidal farms is a challenging task. Many studies have shown the applicability of the Blade Element Momentum (BEM) method for modeling the interaction of turbines in tidal arrays. Apart from its well-known capabilities, there is a scarcity of research using BEM to model tidal stream energy farms. Therefore, the main aim of this numerical study is to simulate a full-scale array in a real geographical position. A fundamental linear relationship to estimate the power capture of full-scale turbines using available kinetic energy flux is being explored. For this purpose, a real site for developing a tidal farm on the southern coasts of Iran is selected. Then, a numerical methodology is validated and calibrated for the established farm by analyzing an array of turbines. A linear equation is proposed to calculate the tidal power of marine hydrokinetic turbines. The results indicate that the difference between the predicted value and the actual power does not exceed 6%.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.866
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.252 · 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
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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicWind Energy Research and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207