MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389615176 · doi:10.3390/su152416759

A Hybrid Model of Variational Mode Decomposition and Long Short-Term Memory for Next-Hour Wind Speed Forecasting in a Hot Desert Climate

2023· article· en· W4389615176 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ghadah Alkhayat, Syed Hamid Hasan, Rashid Mehmood

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Load and Power Forecasting
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMean absolute percentage errorMean squared errorWind speedWind powerMeteorologyTerrainWind power forecastingNumerical weather predictionFeature engineeringComputer scienceMode (computer interface)Deep learningPower (physics)Environmental scienceStatisticsElectric power systemMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advancements in technology, policies, and cost reductions have led to rapid growth in wind power (WP) production. One of the major challenges in wind energy production is the instability of WP generation due to weather changes. Efficient power grid management requires accurate power output forecasting. New wind energy forecasting methods based on deep learning (DL) are delivering competitive performance versus traditional methods, like numerical weather prediction (NWP), statistical models and machine learning (ML) models. This is truer for short-term prediction. Since there is a relationship between methods, climates and forecasting complexity, forecasting methods do not always perform the same depending on the climate and terrain of the data source. This paper presents a novel model that combines the variational mode decomposition (VMD) method with a long short-term memory (LSTM) model for next-hour wind speed (WS) prediction in a hot desert climate, such as the climate in Saudi Arabia. The proposed model performance is compared to two other hybrid models, six DL models and four ML models using different feature sets. Also, the proposed model is tested on data from different climates, Caracas and Toronto. The proposed model showed a forecast skill (FS) between 61% and 74% based on mean absolute error (MAE), 64% and 72% based on root mean square error (RMSE), and 59% and 68% based on mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) for locations in Saudi Arabia.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.695

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicEnergy Load and Power ForecastingFrench-language works237,207