MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4255849962 · doi:10.5194/wes-2019-16

US East Coast synthetic aperture radar wind atlas for offshore wind energy

2019· preprint· en· W4255849962 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tobias Ahsbahs, Galen Maclaurin, Caroline Draxl, Christopher Jackson, Frank Monaldo, Merete Badger

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Renewable Energy LaboratoryOffice of Energy EfficiencyWind Energy Technologies OfficeU.S. Department of EnergyOffice of Energy Efficiency and Renewable EnergyNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarWind speedBuoyWeather Research and Forecasting ModelMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceSubmarine pipelineOffshore wind powerRemote sensingWind directionRange (aeronautics)RadarGeologyWind powerGeographyOceanographyComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. We present the first synthetic aperture radar (SAR)-based offshore wind atlas of the US East Coast from Georgia to the Canadian border. Images from Radarsat-1, Envisat, Sentinel-1A, and Sentinel-1B are processed to wind maps using the Geophysical Model Function (GMF) CMOD5.N. Extensive comparisons with 6,008 collocated buoy observations revealed that biases of the individual system range from −0.8 to 0.6 m/s. Unbiased wind retrievals are crucial for producing an accurate wind atlas and intercalibration for correcting these biases by adjusting the normalized radar cross section is applied. The intercalibrated SAR observations show biases in the range of to −0.2 to 0.0 m/s, while at the same time improving the root mean squared error from 1.67 to 1.46 m/s. These intercalibrated SAR observations are, for the first time, aggregated to create a wind atlas. Monthly averages are used to correct artefacts from seasonal biases. The SAR wind atlas is used as a reference to study wind resources derived from the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) model. Comparisons focus on the spatial variation of wind resources and show that model results estimate lower coastal wind speed gradients than those from SAR. At sites designated for offshore wind development by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, mean wind speeds typically vary between 0.3 and 0.5 m/s for SAR and less than 0.2 m/s for the WRF model within each site. Findings indicate that wind speed gradients and variation might be underestimated in mesoscale model outputs along US East Coast.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.362
Threshold uncertainty score0.720

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→