Machine Learning-Based Approach to Wind Turbine Wake Prediction under Yawed Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As wind energy continues to be a crucial part of sustainable power generation, the need for precise and efficient modeling of wind turbines, especially under yawed conditions, becomes increasingly significant. Addressing this, the current study introduces a machine learning-based symbolic regression approach for elucidating wake dynamics. Utilizing WindSE’s actuator line method (ALM) and Large Eddy Simulation (LES), we model an NREL 5-MW wind turbine under yaw conditions ranging from no yaw to 40 degrees. Leveraging a hold-out validation strategy, the model achieves robust hyper-parameter optimization, resulting in high predictive accuracy. While the model demonstrates remarkable precision in predicting wake deflection and velocity deficit at both the wake center and hub height, it shows a slight deviation at low downstream distances, which is less critical to our focus on large wind farm design. Nonetheless, our approach sets the stage for advancements in academic research and practical applications in the wind energy sector by providing an accurate and computationally efficient tool for wind farm optimization. This study establishes a new standard, filling a significant gap in the literature on the application of machine learning-based wake models for wind turbine yaw wake prediction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".