MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Data-based modelling of arrays of wave energy systems: Experimental tests, models, and validation

2024· article· en· W4394903886 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueControl Engineering Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWave and Wind Energy Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersH2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie ActionsHorizon 2020Horizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeEuropean CommissionQueen's UniversityEuropean Cooperation in Science and TechnologyQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsEnergy (signal processing)Computer scienceScalingEnergy modelingKey (lock)SimulationIndustrial engineeringEngineeringControl engineeringSystems engineeringEfficient energy useElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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 score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.188 · 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