Capturing Spatial Influence in Wind Prediction With a Graph Convolutional Neural Network
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
Nowadays, wind power is playing a significant role in power systems; it is necessary to improve the prediction accuracy, which will help make better use of wind sources. The existing neural network methods, such as recurrent neural network (RNN), have been widely used in wind prediction; however, RNN models only consider the dynamic change of temporal conditions and ignore the spatial correlation. In this work, we combine the graph convolutional neural (GCN) with the gated recurrent unit (GRU) to do prediction on simulated and real wind speed and wind power data sets. The improvements of prediction results by GCN in all wind speed experiments show its ability to capture spatial dependence and improve prediction accuracy. Although the GCN does not perform well in short-term wind power prediction as the change of wind power data is not so smooth due to the limitation of turbine operation, the results of long-term prediction still prove the performance of GCN.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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