MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4316040028 · doi:10.5194/wes-8-85-2023

Effect of different source terms and inflow direction in atmospheric boundary modeling over the complex terrain site of Perdigão

2023· article· en· W4316040028 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

VenueWind energy science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeEuropean CommissionNational Science Foundation
KeywordsTerrainInflowReynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equationsGeologyRidgeTurbulenceMeteorologyElevation (ballistics)Wind directionLarge eddy simulationPlanetary boundary layerBoundary layerComputational fluid dynamicsWind speedMechanicsAtmospheric sciencesEnvironmental scienceGeometryPhysicsMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Assessing wind conditions in complex terrain requires computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations incorporating an accurate parameterization of forest canopy effects and Coriolis effects. This study investigates how incorporating source terms such as the presence of trees and the Coriolis force can improve flow predictions. Furthermore, the study examines the impact of using different sets of atmospheric boundary layer inflow profiles, including idealized profiles with a logarithmic velocity profile, and a set of fully developed profiles from a pressure-driven precursor simulation. A three-dimensional steady Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) equations model is set up using OpenFOAM to simulate the flow over a complex terrain site comprising two parallel ridges near Perdigão, Portugal. A 7.5 km×7.5 km terrain of the Perdigão site is constructed from elevation data centered around a 100 m met-mast located on the southwest ridge. A 30 min averaged stationary period is simulated, which corresponds to near-neutral conditions at met-mast Tower 20 located at the southwest ridge. The period corresponds to the wind coming from southwest at 231∘ at 100 m height above ground at Tower 20. Five case setups are simulated using a combination of different source terms, turbulence models and inflow profiles. The prediction capability of these models is analyzed for different groups of towers on the southwest ridge and, on the towers further downstream inside the valley, on the northeast ridge. Including a canopy model improves predictions close to the ground for most of the towers on the southwest ridge and inside the valley. Large uncertainties are seen in field measurement data inside the valley, which is a recirculation zone, and large prediction errors are seen in the wind velocity, wind direction and turbulent kinetic profiles for most of the models. The predictions on the northeast ridge are dependent on the extent of recirculation predicted inside the valley. The inflow wind direction plays an important role in wind profile predictions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.178
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.212 · 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