MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239364725 · doi:10.1115/1.1626128

Probabilistic Analysis of LIST Data for the Estimation of Extreme Design Loads for Wind Turbine Components*†

2003· article· en· W4239364725 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Solar Energy Engineering · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGumbel distributionExtreme value theoryWeibull distributionTurbineExtrapolationInflowGeneralized extreme value distributionSampling (signal processing)Computer scienceProbabilistic logicWind engineeringStatisticsMathematicsEngineeringMeteorologyStructural engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The robust estimation of wind turbine design loads for service lifetimes of 30 to 50 years that are based on limited field measurements is a challenging problem. Estimating the long-term load distribution involves the integration of conditional distributions of extreme loads over the mean wind speed and turbulence intensity distributions. However, the accuracy of the statistical extrapolation can be sensitive to both model and sampling errors. Using measured inflow and structural data from the Long Term Inflow and Structural Test (LIST) program, this paper presents a comparative assessment of extreme loads using three distributions: namely, the Gumbel, Weibull and Generalized Extreme Value distributions. The paper uses L-moments, in place of traditional product moments, with the purpose of reducing the sampling error. The paper discusses the effects of modeling and sampling errors and highlights the practical limitations of extreme value theory.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.188
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.133 · 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