MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392401952 · doi:10.18280/jesa.570103

Wind Turbine Manufacturing, Trends, Capacity, Performance, and Strategy

2024· article· fr· W4392401952 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Fouzi Ghoumah, Ayşe Tansu, Rusul Saad Hadi, Monaem Elmnifi, Mustafa Abdul Salam Mustafa, Hasan Sh. Majdi, Hazim Moria, Laith Jaafer Habeeb

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEngineering
TopicWind Energy Research and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbineEnvironmental scienceWind powerMarine engineeringEngineeringAerospace engineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of wind turbine technology has been studied globally and has shown that energy production from wind has become one of the most balanced, advanced, and promising ways for the future and falls within clean energy generation technologies.Wind energy development has shown many positive impacts on the environment and the economy in many countries.Wind turbine manufacturers have developed modern, powerful turbines that work well in weak wind conditions.These conditions make it necessary to increase the capacity of manufacturing companies to manufacture wind turbines in all the processes and procedures involved in them.This study focuses on providing manufacturing companies with the latest developments and most efficient manufacturing processes to improve wind turbine outcomes.It also explains how certain activities and procedures in manufacturing practices can affect the overall performance of a turbine.Through the analysis, we have observed that manufacturers have responded to the demand for models with cutting speeds of 2.1 m/s to 4 m/s by preparing more models in this range for future production.Models with very high cutting speeds have also been compensated for by preparing more ranges with ultra-fast cutting speeds for future production.Analysis of the turning diameter showed that sufficient response was not achieved, as insufficient attention was paid to the diameter range of 50-100 meters.The manufacturers' response indicates that the bulk of future production will be within the power ranges between 2001 and 6000 kW.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.943
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.221 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal Européen des Systèmes AutomatisésSame topicWind Energy Research and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207