MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311789551 · doi:10.3390/en15249484

Deep Learning for Modeling an Offshore Hybrid Wind–Wave Energy System

2022· article· en· W4311789551 on OpenAlexaff
Mahsa Dehghan Manshadi, Milad Mousavi, M. Soltani, Amir Mosavi, Levente Kovács

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNemzeti Kutatási, Fejlesztési és Innovaciós AlapHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeEuropean Commission
KeywordsWind powerOffshore wind powerInstallationTurbineMarine engineeringRenewable energyPower (physics)ConvertersEnergy (signal processing)Computer scienceEngineeringElectrical engineeringMechanical engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The combination of an offshore wind turbine and a wave energy converter on an integrated platform is an economical solution for the electrical power demand in coastal countries. Due to the expensive installation cost, a prediction should be used to investigate whether the location is suitable for these sites. For this purpose, this research presents the feasibility of installing a combined hybrid site in the desired coastal location by predicting the net produced power due to the environmental parameters. For combining these two systems, an optimized array includes ten turbines and ten wave energy converters. The mathematical equations of the net force on the two introduced systems and the produced power of the wind turbines are proposed. The turbines’ maximum forces are 4 kN, and for the wave energy converters are 6 kN, respectively. Furthermore, the comparison is conducted in order to find the optimum system. The comparison shows that the most effective system of desired environmental condition is introduced. A number of machine learning and deep learning methods are used to predict key parameters after collecting the dataset. Moreover, a comparative analysis is conducted to find a suitable model. The models’ performance has been well studied through generating the confusion matrix and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of the hybrid site. The deep learning model outperformed other models, with an approximate accuracy of 0.96.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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