MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392375178 · doi:10.1038/s43247-024-01260-7

Identification of reliable locations for wind power generation through a global analysis of wind droughts

2024· article· en· W4392375178 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

VenueCommunications Earth & Environment · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsMerck Canada Inc. (Canada)
FundersCarnegie Institution of Washington
KeywordsWind powerIdentification (biology)Environmental scienceMeteorologyClimatologyGeographyGeologyEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Wind droughts, or prolonged periods of low wind speeds, pose challenges for electricity systems largely reliant on wind generation. Using weather reanalysis data, we analyzed the global distribution of and trends in wind droughts using an energy deficit metric that integrates the depth and duration of wind droughts. We identified regions with high power densities, low seasonal variability, and limited weather fluctuations that favor wind power generation, such as the American Midwest, Australia, the Sahara, Argentina, Central Asia, and Southern Africa. Northwestern Europe has high power densities but experiences more frequent and prolonged wind droughts due to higher weather variability. We found little evidence for strong trends in wind droughts over recent decades in most places. Rather, the most severe wind droughts in many places occurred before wind power substantially penetrated power systems, which suggests that historical weather data can be useful in designing reliable wind-reliant electricity systems.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.543
Threshold uncertainty score0.447

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.243 · 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