Data-based modelling of arrays of wave energy systems: Experimental tests, models, and validation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the key steps towards economic feasibility of wave energy conversion technology concerns scaling up to farms of multiple devices, in the attempt to reduce installation costs by sharing infrastructure, and a consequent drop in levelised cost of energy. Moreover, whenever wave energy systems are deployed in proximity (in so-called arrays), the exploitation of the hydrodynamic interactions between single devices is fully enabled, potentially increasing the final energy outcome. To achieve this in real (operational) time, the employed energy-maximising control strategies require control-oriented array models, able to efficiently describe the dynamics of these interconnected systems in a representative fashion. This can be, nonetheless, a difficult task when considering first principles alone, under small motion assumptions, for modelling purposes. Recognising the uncertainty associated to array numerical models obtained from the linearisation of simplified system equations around their equilibria, this paper presents models of several array configurations identified following a frequency domain approach on the basis of experimental data. Tailored tests on laboratory-scale devices have been designed and conducted in the Aalborg University (Denmark) wave tank facility, with the purpose of performing representative system identification of the wave energy systems arrays. The obtained models are validated on different representative sea states configurations, in controlled and uncontrolled motion operational conditions. The validation results are fully discussed and analysed in terms of standard error measures and time lag, while the obtained models are made freely accessible via a linked repository (named OCEAN), in the attempt to openly provide validated models for different array configurations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".